Sep 22, 2020 City Council

>> MAYOR RENO: GOOD AFTERNOON. IT IS 6:00 P.M., SEPTEMBER 22.

[Call to Order, Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance and the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution]

[00:00:05]

WE HAVE ADDED THE PREAMBLE TO THE AGENDA.

I CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO IT THE FIRST THREE WORDS "WE, THE PEOPLE" AND "WE, THE PEOPLE" CAN REFER TO THE FIRST GENERATIONS AMERICANS THAT HAVEN'T RECEIVED THEIR INDEPENDENCE FROM ENGLAND OR SETTING UP A TO CONDUCT BUSINESS.

OR "WE, THE PEOPLE" CAN BE OURSELVES.

WE INHERITED THE CONSTITUTION FROM GENERATIONS AND A CONTRACT WE ESTABLISHED WITH OURSELVES ON HOW WE WISH TO GOVERN.

THE AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT COMES FROM THE PEOPLE.

AS LINCOLN SAID. GOVERNMENT OF, FOR AND BY THE PEOPLE. WE ARE A REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC. THE COUNCIL IS A REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF GOVERNMENT. WHEN I SAY WE ARE A REPRESENTATIVE, IT DOESN'T MEAN WE LOOK LIKE THE CITIZENS OF MIDLOTHIAN. IT MEANS THAT WE ARE THE ADVOCATES FOR THE CITIZENS OF MIDLOTHIAN.

WE ARE HERE IN HOPE AND WISDOM TO DO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

AND WHAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE.

SO, WE ARE -- I SAY THESE WORDS BECAUSE I FEEL WE ARE AT A JUNCTURE IN OUR NATION AS TO WHICH DIRECTION ARE WE GOING TO GO. ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OR ARE WE AT A POINT IN HISTORY WHERE WE TAKE A DIFFERENT TOOK. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I CALL ON COUNCILMAN RODGERS TO LEAD THE INNOVATION AND THE PRAYER.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: THANK YOU.

BEAR WITH ME AS WE PRAY. THANK YOU.

WE ARE THANKFUL TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO MEET AND JOIN TOGETHER IN FREE SOCIETY. AS A FREE PEOPLE.

AND TO BE ABLE TO MAKE DECISIONS IN THE GOOD OF ALL THE COMMUNITY. WE ASK, LORD, FOR YOU TO BE WITH THE FAMILY OF THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBERG AT THIS TIME. BE WITH THAT FAMILY AS THEY HAVE INCURRED A LOSS. AND, OF COURSE, WE WILL BE GOING THROUGH CHANGES AS A COUNTRY IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

WITH A NEW PLACEMENT OF A NEW SUPREME COURT JUSTICE.

WE JUST ASK THAT YOU WOULD PROVIDE A PEACE OVER OUR COUNTRY AS A WHOLE DURING A TIME OF ELECTION AND THE SLIGHTEST CHANGE WITH THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, OF COURSE, WITH COVID SITUATION AND SO MANY OTHERS THAT YOU BE WITH OUR COUNTRY AS A WHOLE. WE ASK, LORD, AND THANK YOU FOR BLESSINGS ON THE COMMUNITY AND WHAT A BLESSING IS IT FOR THIS COUNCIL TO SERVE. I KNOW EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THE HEARTS OF EACH AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL WHO SERVES ON THIS COUNCIL AND THE HEARTS OF MANY WHO SERVED IN THE PAST.

WE ARE THANKFUL TO SERVE THE GREAT PEOPLE OF THIS COMMUNITY AND TRY TO DO OUR BEST TO SERVE ALL.

LORD, WE WOULD ALSO ASK YOU TO BE WITH WAYNE SIBLEY WHO TYPICALLY SITS IN THE CHAIR THAT I'M IN TONIGHT.

WAYNE IS HAVING SOME MEDICAL PROCEDURES DONE.

WE ASK THAT YOU WOULD BE WITH HIM AND BE WITH THE DOCTORS AND PROVIDE WISDOM WITHIN THE DECISIONS THAT THEY MAKE AND A SPEEDY RECOVERY TO BRING WAYNE BACK TO SERVE WITH US AGAIN.

JESUS NAME WE PRAY. AMEN.

>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG; I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.

>> MAYOR RENO: REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 2020-337 CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. IF ANYONE WISHES TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL, WE INVITE THEM TO JOIN NOW.

HAVE A SHEET FILLED OUT TO THE CITY SECRETARY.

I DO NOT -- DO WE HAVE ANYBODY AT THIS TIME WHO WISHES TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL? OKAY.

[Consent Agenda]

THE OTHER TWO ITEMS ARE CONSIDERED WITH ONE VOTE.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA?

>> MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO

[00:05:01]

FIRST TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA HAVE BEEN PASSED.

[2020-340]

CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING 18-MONTH EXTENSION OF FIVE-YEAR SUNSET CLAUSE OF A GRANT INITIALLY AWARDED BY THE MIDLOTHIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 4B TO ASSIST IN THE FUNDING OF THE FOUNDERS ROW PROJECT. ALAN, DO YOU WISH --

>> THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. >> MAYOR RENO: MY APOLOGIES.

SO COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS?

>> I JUST WANT TO PULL THIS ONE OUT BECAUSE BEING A SMALL TOWN OF THIS IS A LOT OF THINGS ARE SAID AND BLAMING STAFF.

THE REASON HE HAS TO DO THIS. AFTER WE WENT THROUGH EVERYTHING WITH THE PARK OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, WE KNOW THAT IS NOT OUR PROBLEM. SO I WANTED TO BRING IT OUT WHAT IS GOING ON ABOUT BLAMING STAFF BECAUSE HE IS 18 MONTHS BEHIND IS NOT WHAT THE ISSUE IS. I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO THINK IT'S BECAUSE OF STAFF WHY HE IS BEHIND.

HE IS HAVING TROUBLE WITH HIS OWN CONTRACTORS AND HIS OWN PEOPLE. STAFF IS DOING EVERYTHING THEY WERE ASKED TO DO AND IN A TIMELY MANNER.

THEY ALWAYS. HAVE I WORKED FOR THEM FOR 15 YEARS AND NEVER HAD A PROBLEM. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON TO PULL IT OUT. ON THAT, MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> MAYOR RENO: WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: ALL IN FAVOR OR PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 5-0. THANK YOU.

I AGREE WHOLE HEARTEDLY WITH YOUR COMMENTS.

NOW WE ARE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[2020-341]

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS THE FINAL PETITION FOR THE CREATION OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

WE HAVE BEEN GOING OVER THIS FOR THE PAST BASICALLY 14 MONTHS WHEN IT STARTED FORMALLY LAST AUGUST.

THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE ESTIMATED TO BE $20 MILLION.

THIS WILL ALLOW THEM AS WELL AS THE CITY TO LEVY AN ASSESSMENT ON EACH PARCEL IN THE DISTRICT IN A MANNER THAT RESULTS IN EQUAL SHARES OF THE COST OF THE PROPERTY THAT ARE SIMILARLY BENEFITED. EXCUSE ME.

ALONG WITH THAT, IT DOES COME WITH A DISIL DISSOLUTION AGREEM.

SO IF THERE IS NO ACTION IT CAN BE DISSOLVED.

SO IT WILL SET THE CLOCK MOVING. WITH THAT I'LL ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL HAS. >> MAYOR RENO: ANY QUESTIONS?

MIKE, YOU HAVE A MOTION? >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: MOVE

TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

SECONDED. >> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I'LL SECOND.

>> I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MAYOR RENO: OKAY. MY APOLOGIES.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: SECONDED.

VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[VOTING] PUBLIC HEARING HEARING IS CLOSED 5-0. COMMENTS QU OR QUESTIONS FROM

COUNCIL? >> THE 24-MONTH TIME PERIOD,

WHEN DOES THE CLOCK START? >> I BELIEVE ONCE THIS IS SIGNED. I MEAN BASICALLY WHEN IT'S SIGNED BY THE MAYOR AND CHRIS IT WILL START.

THEY HAVE ALREADY NOTARIZED THE DOCUMENTS THEMSELVES SO IT

SHOULD BEGIN TOMORROW MORNING. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. [VOTING]

ITEM PASSES 5-0. >> THANK, Y'ALL.

>> MAYOR RENO: OKAY. OPEN ITEM 2020-342.

[2020-342]

MARCOS? >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

COUNCILMEMBERS. THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON MAIN STREET, 287. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WAS A FORMER SALON. THE PICTURES HERE SHOW YOU THE CURRENT STATE OF HOW THE PROPERTY LOOKS RIGHT NOW.

THE APPLICANT DOES PLAN TO REDEVELOP THE BUILDING.

AS WELL AS THE PARKING LOT. NO DINE-IN SEATING PROPOSED AT

[00:10:01]

ALL ASPHALT WILL BE REPLACED WITH THE NEW CONCRETE PAVEMENT.

THE PARKING LOT WILL BE RESTRIPED.

ENOUGH A.D.A. RAMPS WILL BE INSTALLED.

NEW DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE WILL BE INSTALLED.

THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS OF THE ENCLOSURE AND THE BUILDING AND THE MONUMENT SIGN WILL ALL MATCH.

THE BUILDING WILL BE REPAINTED. DECORATIVE PANELING WILL WRAP AROUND THREE SIDES OF THAT BUILDING.

APPLICANT WILL ALSO INSTALL THE COMMERCIAL GRADE WINDOW AND A NEW GLASS DOOR. ET CETERA.

HERE IS A VIEW OF WHAT THE FRONT MAY LOOK LIKE.

LANDSCAPING WILL BE INSTALLED TO ENHANCE PROPERTY.

WE SENT OUT 12 LETTERS WITHIN 200 FEET.

STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES.

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA ITEM BY STAFF. I CAN TAKE QUESTIONS YOU MAY

HAVE. >> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

[VOTING] >> SHE'LL BE BACK.

DO A VOICE? >> ALL IN FAVOR, AAYE.

>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSE? CLOSE BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> I WILL MAKE A COMMENT THIS IS A GREAT USE OF REDESIGNING AND RETOOLING THE BUILDING THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

JUDGING BY THE FRONTAGE AND JUDGING BY WHAT THEY PUT TOGETHER IT LOOKS LIKE AN EXCITING PLAN.

SO, WITH THAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE. SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. [VOTING] ITEM APPROVED 5-0. OPEN ITEM 2020-343, CONDUCT A

[2020-343]

>> COUNCILMEMBER WICKLIFFE: I'M OBTAIN.

>> MAYOR RENO: IT WILL ONLY TAKE THREE TO PASS.

>> THE APPLICANT PLANS TO DEVELOP THE LOT WITH THE SIX ACRES OF THE USABLE COMMON AREA. IT'S ZONED AGRICULTURAL AND IT DOES LIE WITHIN WHAT WE CALL THE LOW-DENSITY SUBURBANS MODUME THAT CALLS FOR -- MODULE, THAT IS CALLING FOR THE HALF ACRE LOT. BASED ON THE APPLICANT PROPOSED LOT SIZES AND THE GARAGE ORIENTATION THEY ARE PROPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. HERE IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN ON THE SCREEN. APPLICANT IS PROPOSING MINIMUM OF THE 9,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS THROUGHOUT THE SITE.

20,000 SQUARE FEET LOTS PROPOSED ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE 14TH STREET. THERE WILL BE AN EIGHT-FOOT WIDE WALKING TRAIL, EQUIPPED PLAYGROUND, COVERED PAVILION, SIDEWALK AND MASONRY WALLS RUN ALONG 14TH STREET AS WELL AS ASHFORD LANE. EXISTING TREES WILL BE PRESERVED ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE AND PRESERVING THEM AT 14TH STREET AND ASHFORD AS WELL. THEY INCLUDE THE ROAD STUBS LEAD TO THE EAST FOR THE FUTURE CONNECTIVITY PURPOSES.

DECORATIVE ACORN LIGHTS AND STAMP-STAINED CONCRETE THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS TABLE HERE IS SHOWN ALSO IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. COMPARING THE EXISTING REQUIREMENTS VERSUS PROPOSED. APPLICANT IS SEEKING AT LEAST 65% FRONT-ENTRY GARAGE. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID REDUCE IT DOWN TO 50%.

THE REMAINDER OF THE GARAGES ARE THE TYPICAL J-SWING AND THE SIDE-ENTRY GARAGE. THIS SLIDE HERE DOES SHOW THE TYPE OF THE GARAGE PRODUCTS THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING.

YOU CAN SEE THE J-SWING IS FORWARD OF THE HOME.

THE FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES ARE SOMEWHAT FLUSH WITH THE REST OF THE FRONT FACADE. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE PLAY AREA, PAVILION, AS WELL AS THE MASONRY WALLS.

16 LETTERS WERE MAILED OUT TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED A TOTAL OF SIX LETTERS IN FAVOR OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.

AS MENTIONED EARLIER THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AT A MINIMUM, STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT THE LARGER TRANSITIONAL LOTS WITHIN THE TRACK "A" SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU FIND IN TRACK "B," THAT THE LARGER LOTS BE INCLUDED IN TRACK "A."

[00:15:08]

LARGER LOTS ON THE EASTERN AROUND THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY WITHIN TRACK "A." NOW THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE REVISED SITE PLAN. THAT IS IN THE PACKET.

THEY ALTERED IT BY REMOVING ONE LOT ALONG THE EASTERN BOUNDARY.

YOU CAN SEE THIS AREA CONSISTS OF 10,000 AND THE 9,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. IT NOW CONSISTS OF ONE LESS LOT.

THOSE LOTS RANGE FROM 11,000 TO 12,000 SQUARE FEET.

WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU MENTIONED THAT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REDUCED THE PERCENTAGES ON THE FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES DOWN TO 50%.

ACTUALLY THEY INCREASED IT BY 50% FROM 0%, CORRECT? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M ON THE SAME PAGE WITH YOU.

THE WAY THAT WHAT YOU FOLKS RECOMMENDED BECAUSE IT'S THE WAY THAT OUR RULES APPLY, THERE ARE ACTUALLY 0% FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES TO WORK FROM. WE HAVE GONE FROM -- IT WAS REQUESTED 0% TO 65% AND THAT THEY BROUGHT IT 0% TO 50%.

>> YOU ARE CORRECT, COUNCILMEMBER.

THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING 65% AND STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING ALL THE GARAGES BE OBSCURED FROM VIEW.

MEANING, THAT THE FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES ARE COMPLETELY PROHIBITED. SO WE WERE LOOKING FOR 0%.

P&Z DID BRING IT UP TO 50%. THAT IS CORRECT.

>> MAYOR RENO: WITHIN THAT THOUGHT, YOU SAY THAT NO MORE THAN 35% OF THE DWELLING UNITS SHALL HAVE.

WHY DO YOU PUT IN THERE? WHY IS THIS NECESSARY?

>> SURE. >> MAYOR RENO: WHEN YOU HAVE

JUST ABOVE IT THE 65%? >> SURE.

WELL, SO THE APPLICANT WAS LOOKING FOR 65%.

THAT IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING.

THE 35% WOULD BE THAT REMAINDER AMOUNT THAT WOULD CONSIST OF THE J-SWING AND SIDE-ENTRY THAT APPLICANT WOULD INCLUDE.

SO THAT 65% AND 35% GIVES YOU THE 100%.

>> MAYOR RENO: MY QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE NECESSITY OF THAT

BEING INSERTED? >> THAT IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS WANTING. THE APPLICANT WANTS 65%.

THEY ARE REQUESTING 65%. AGAIN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT SECTION FIVE OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS, WE DO HAVE AN ALLOWANCE FOR 65%. BUT AGAIN, THE COMPREHENSIVE

PLAN -- >> MAYOR RENO: THE VERBIAGE TO ME IS UNNECESSARY. IN FACT, IT SHOULDN'T BE THERE.

NO MORE THAN 35% SHALL BE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING --

>> I THINK IT'S THE STAFF, IT'S THE NO MORE THAN THE 35%.

>> MAYOR RENO: YEAH. >> SO I.E. --

>> MAYOR RENO: OR EVEN PUTTING IT IN THERE.

BUT IT'S THE "NO MORE." TWO "NO MORE."

>> IF WE HAD 100% OF THE SIDE-ENTRY GARAGES WE WOULD

HAVEN'T A PROBLEM. >> MAYOR RENO: IT'S ONCE YOU LEFT OVER. ONCE YOU DO THE FRONT ENTRY, THAT IS WHAT IS LEFT OVER. IF YOU ARE GOING TO DO ONE OF

THE THREE THINGS, RIGHT? >> RIGHT.

THAT IS ONLY GOING TO CONSIST OF THE J-SWING, SIDE-ENTRY OR REAR-ENTRY. NOT THE FRONT-ENTRY.

>> MAYOR RENO: I KNOW. BUT ONCE YOU SET THE FRONT-ENTRY THE ONLY THING LEFT IS ONE OF THE THREE OPTIONS.

>> CORRECT. >> MAYOR RENO: THEREFORE YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE WHATEVER PERCENTAGE IS LEFT.

THIS VERBIAGE TO ME IS NOT NECESSARY.

IN FACT, IT FORCES YOU TO DO EXACTLY 65% AND EXACTLY 35%.

>> CORRECT. >> MAYOR RENO: IT NEGATES NO

MORE. >> I SEE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

IT'S ALMOST A PLAY ON WORDS, I GUESS.

ULTIMATELY WE ARE STILL LOOKING AT 65% --

>> I THINK WHAT THE MAYOR IS SAYING, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, STRETCH THE "NO MORE THAN 35%." IF THEY WANT TO BUILD 100% SIDE OR REAR-ENTRY, WE ARE PERFECTLY FINE WITH THAT. SO DON'T CAP 35%.

>> MAYOR RENO: BUT I AGREE WITH MIKE, I GUESS -- I'M NOT AGREEING WITH 65%. BUT WE'LL GET TO THAT IN A

MOMENT. >> UNDERSTOOD.

>> THAT IS THE ONLY QUESTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I FULLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT I THOUGHT WE WERE AT.

WE WERE AT 0% AND IT HAS COME TO 0% TO 50% AND REQUESTED 65%.

UPPER TREND FROM WHAT STATED IN THE RULES AND THE APPLICATIONS.

>> YES, SIR. >> MAYOR RENO: SO HOW DOES THIS CONFLICT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN?

[00:20:02]

>> SURE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. IT BASICALLY STATES ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT, FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES PROHIBITED.

NEW DEVELOPMENTS SHOULD REALLY CONSIST OF THE REAR-ENTRY GARAGES OR THE GARAGES THAT ARE OBSCURED FROM VIEW SET WELL BACK. THAT IS THE MAIN POINT.

SO HAVING A SIDE-ENTRY GARAGE THAT IS SET BACK THAT IS OBSCURED FROM VIEW OR REAR-ENTRY GARAGE; MEANING, MORE OR LESS REAR-ENTRY LIKE ACTUALLY HAVING ALLEY ACCESS.

THAT IS MORE OR LESS WHAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS SAYING WE

SHOULD BE STRIVING FOR. >> MAYOR RENO: MY QUESTION IS NOT LIMITED TO THE GARAGES. HOW ELSE DOES IT CONFLICT WITH

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? >> SURE.

I BELIEVE LOOKING AT -- LET ME PULL UP THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

>> ACCORDING TO THIS, IT SHOULD BE 20,000 SQUARE FOOT OR BIGGER BECAUSE IT'S SUBURBAN LOW-DENSITY.

>> RIGHT. THAT WILL CALL FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. WITH THEM HAVING THE 9,000 MINIMUM, THE 20,000 MINIMUM WORKS FINE.

VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU HAVE HERE IN BRANDY RIDGE AS WELL.

BUT, YEAH, 20,000 MINIMUM, HALF ACRE IS WHAT YOU SHOULD BE, WHAT WE SHOULD BE BUILDING WITHIN THE SUBURBAN LOW DENSITY MODULE.

>> MAYOR RENO: OKAY. >> DOES THIS EVEN PRESENT ITSELF ON WHAT THEY ARE PROVIDING? DOES IT PRESENT SOMEWHAT CLOSE TO AUTUMN RUN? AUTUMN RUN IS MORE OF A 10 TO

20, ISN'T IT? >> LET'S SEE.

AUTUMN RUN DOES HAVE, IT HAS, IT DEFINITELY HAS THE RANGES IN THE LOT SIZES. I MEAN THEY HAVE A LOT OF 9,000S. BUT I BELIEVE AS YOU GO FURTHER

WEST, THOSE LOTS -- >> LARGER VOLUME.

>> YEAH. >> CLOSER TO 20S?

>> YES, SIR. >> ACROSS STREET THERE IS A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION GOING ON. I THINK IT'S ACROSS THE STREET.

IT MAY NOT BE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET BUT THEY ARE

BEGINNING TO PAVE ROADS. >> YES, SIR.

THEY HAVE ALREADY STARTED TO PAVE THE ROADS AND THOSE ARE ALL GOING TO BE 20,000 SQUARE FEET. 20,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.

YES, SIR. >> WHAT ARE THESE AGAIN?

>> MORE OR LESS RANGE CLOSER TO THE 9,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE.

NOW WITHIN THAT, THEY DO, THEY HAVE EMBEDDED SOME 11,000 AND

10,000S. >> TRACK "B"?

TRACK "B" IS SIMILAR TO THAT? >> TRACK "B" IS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WOULD SEE THE BRANDY RIDGE. THAT MORE OR LESS, THAT SIDE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT DEFINITELY MEETS THE INTENT OF THE

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> YOU SAID THE SIDEWALKS ALONG

14TH ARE INCLUDED? >> YES, SIR.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A TRAIL, WE DO HAVE A TRAIL SYSTEM THAT I BELIEVE ALREADY INSTALLED ALONG WHAT I CONSIDER THE WEST SIDE OF THE 14TH STREET. THEY WOULD INSTALL FIVE-FOOT SIDEWALKS ON THE EAST SIDE AND ALSO INSTALL SIDEWALK ON ASHBURN LANE. IT WOULD RUN THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. THEY HAVE AN EIGHT-FOOT WIDE TRAIL SYSTEM THAT RUNS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS

WELL. >> SO THE SUBDIVISION, WE MAY AS WELL CALL IT A -- WHAT HE WITH HAVE WHAT? FIVE LOTS THAT ARE 20,000? I WILL KNOW WE MAY GET ABOVE 9,000 ON SOME OF THE OTHERS BUT WITHIN THE REFERENCE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A 9,000 TO A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT SUBDIVISION.

>> YES, SIR. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MAJORITY OF THE LOTS, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE REALLY RANGING FROM THE 9,000 TO 12,000. SEVEN GOES FROM 12,000 TO 14,000. VERY LIMITED ON WHAT YOU HAVE OVER 14,000. THEY ARE CALLING OUT 11.

>> OPEN SPACE IN PLAY AMENITIES AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS MEET

NORMAL REQUIREMENTS? >> THEY DO MEET THE NORMAL REQUIREMENTS. THEY HAVE EXCEEDED ON THE AMOUNT OF THE OPEN SPACE THAT IS REQUIRED BY HAVING THE 6.5 ACRES. THEY DID INCLUDE A PLAYGROUND WITH A PAVILION AND WALKING TRAIL.

THOSE ITEMS DEFINITELY MEET WHAT SECTION FIVE CALLS OUT WHEN YOU ARE TRYING TO DO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S ULTIMATELY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WE FIND

DIFFERENCES. >> IS THERE A RETENTION POND ON

THERE? >> SORRY?

>> IS THERE A RETENTION POND ON THERE?

>> I BELIEVE IF THERE IS A RETENTION POND IT SHOULD BE IN CA2X. AND RETENTION FOR WATER INCA6X AS WELL. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND WATER SHED TO THE SOUTH AND SOMEWHAT TO THE NORTHWEST.

>> I BELIEVE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE LOTS, THE IT 9,000 SQUARE

FOOTERS ARE 70, 72 FEET WIDE? >> YES, SIR.

[00:25:01]

IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT 70 FEET WIDE FOR THE 9,000S.

>> GO BACK TO THAT SATELLITE IF YOU DON'T MIND, MARCOS.

>> SURE. >> THE ONE THAT HAS GOT -- YEAH, THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. I'M HAVING SOME -- [INAUDIBLE] I'M HAVING HEARTBURN ON THE PEOPLE WITH 5 AND 10-ACRE LOTS ALL THE WAY AROUND IT.

EVEN BRANDY RIDGE. AT THE 20,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.

IT'S ACROSS THE STREET. I DON'T SEE MY WAY OF VOTING YES ON 10,000 SQUARE FOOT. OR 7,000 TO 10,000 SQUARE FOOT

LOTS. >> I THINK IT WAS STAFF'S POSITION IN THAT WAS LOOKING FROM WHERE THE, AGAIN, THE TRANSITIONAL LOTS THAT RUN ALONG THIS EAST SIDE AND THE SOUTHERN SIDE. MEANING, THAT YOU WOULD SEE MORE OF MAYBE THE TRACK "B" STYLE LOTS RUN ALONG THAT SOUTHERN

SIDE. >> ON 14TH STREET, THE BRANDY RIDGE STYLE WITH THE HOUSES THERE.

YOU HAVE THE HOMES THAT ARE THE NICER SIZE LOTS.

THAT IS WHAT ONE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY WILL LOOK LIKE.

I DON'T SEE MY WAY VOTING FOR THIS.

>> MAYOR RENO: THIS IS TOO MUCH DEVIATION FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I EXPECT A HALF ACRE AND LESS FRONT-ENTRY AND CLOSER TO THE HALF ACRES WOULD BE --

>> UNDERSTOOD. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE ALSO. THEY MAY WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS

ALSO AS WELL. >> MAYOR RENO: OKAY.

WE ARE STILL OPEN. IF THE APPLICANT WISHES TO COME

UP. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

MY NAME IS TODD WINTERS WITH THE ENGINEERING CONCEPTS IN WILY, TEXAS. MARCOS DOES A GOOD JOB TO PRESENT THE PROJECT AND GIVE YOU THE FACTS HERE.

ONE THING I WANT TO DO, TALK ABOUT IS -- WELL, WE'LL GET TO THE FRONT-ENTRY GARAGE AND THAT TYPE OF STUFF, TOO.

THE PROJECT OVERALL, YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT.

WHERE IT IS. YOU KNOW THERE IS CONSTRUCTION GOING ON ACROSS THE STREET. SO 14TH STREET, BASICALLY KIND OF CUT OFF THE CORNER HERE FROM THE OWNER'S PROPERTY.

WHICH WE WILL CONTINUE THE FEEL AND THE LOT SIZE OVER HERE.

WE ARE GOING TO EXAND THE BRANDY RIDGE DRIVE OUT -- EXPAND THE BRANDY RIDGE OUT TO THE 14TH STREET AND NEW MEDIAN WITH A LEFT TURN LANE SO THERE IS PROTECTED TURNING MOVEMENT THERE TO HELP THE SUBDIVISION TO THE WEST THERE AS WELL.

WE WILL HAVE THE ENHANCED ENTRY FEATURES.

ONE REASON WE THINK IT FITS IS THERE ARE SIMILAR LOTS, TO THE NORTH AND TO THE SOUTH. SIMILAR PRODUCT.

THE LOTS ARE 72 FOOT WIDE AS YOU ASKED, MR. RODGERS.

WHAT IT DOES, IT ALLOWS US FOR THE SIX-FOOT SIDE BACK SETBACK.

THAT WILL ALLOW FOR FRONT-ENTRY, J-SWING OR A SIDE-ENTRY LOT.

SO CHIP BOYD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY IS HERE TO TALK MORE ABOUT WHAT THOSE LOOK LIKE AND HOW THOSE WORK.

AND HOW WE WANT TO LET THE MARKET DICTATE WHAT THE PUBLIC WANTS AND WHAT THEIR DESIRES ARE.

WE DO MEET ALL THE P.D. REQUIREMENTS AS FAR AS THE AMENITIES. WE'RE ARE GOING TO MAKE AT IT NICE SUBDIVISION AND HAVE A SCREENING WALL ALONG 14TH STREET ON THE EAST SIDE TO PROVIDE SOME SEPARATION FROM THIS AND THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, OR THE ADJOINING TO THE WEST THERE. WE'LL HAVE FREE PRESERVATION AREAS -- TREE PRESERVATION AREAS TO MAKE IT A USABLE PARK SPACE.

WE HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH A GAS COMPANY ABOUT HAVING A WALKING TRAIL THROUGH THERE. WE DID EXPAND THE LOT SIZE ON THE EASTERN LINE. WE HAVE SOME CONNECTIVITY THERE TO, YOU KNOW, EXPAND TO THE EAST AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.

WE ARE BUILDING RUSTY RUN DRIVE ON YOUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN.

WE ARE BUILDING THAT THROUGH THERE.

I THINK THAT IS A 60-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY AND WIDER STREET.

IT WILL LINE UP WITH THE RUSTY RUN ACROSS THE STREET.

WE WILL PUT IN A LEFT TURN LANE THERE AS WELL, SO WE HAVE A PROTECTED SIDE. THIS WILL BE A VERY NICE SUBDIVISION. IT DOES HAVE REALLY GOOD TERRAIN. THERE WILL BE RETAINING WALLS HERE. IT DOES DRAIN IN TWOIRECTIONS.

THERE IS A DETENTION POND AT THE OPPOSITE CORNERS THERE AS MARCOS DESCRIBED. IT WILL BE SCREENED.

WHAT WE DO ON THE SCREENING ALONG 14TH SCREEN, 6-FOOT MASONRY WALL. 146-FOOT LANDSCAPE EASEMENT THERE. THE WALL IS ON THE BACK OF THAT.

WE WILL HAVE LANDSCAPE, YOU KNOW, SHRUBS AND THE TREES ALONG THE FRONT. WHETHER HE HAVE THE WALL DOWN TO ABOUT LOT 9. I THINK THAT IS BLOCK 8 THERE.

WE HAVE A ROD IRON FENCE ALONG THE LOTS THAT BACK UP TO THE

[00:30:01]

WE TALK TO MARCOS ABOUT PLANTING THE TREES THERE TO SHADE THE WALKING TRAIL ON THAT SIDE. THERE IS A TEN-FOOT TRAIL EXISTING THERE THAT WE WILL ENHANCE WITH THE LIVE SCREENING.

A ROD IRON FENCE AND A BERM WITH TREES AND PLANTINGS.

ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET, I THINK WE ARE BUILDING A FIVE-FOOT SIDEWALK THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF 14TH STREET.

AND ACROSS ASHFORD THERE AS WELL.

WE HAVE A GOOD BUFFERING SYSTEM AND GOOD SEPARATION.

WE HAVE A NICE FLOW THROUGH HERE WITH THE CONNECTIVITY.

YOU KNOW WE THINK IT WILL BE A REALLY NICE PRODUCT.

I DO WANT CHIP TO COME UP AND SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE FRONT-ENTRY. I THINK IT WILL CLARIFY SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS, MR. MAYOR, ABOUT THE J-SWING AND WHERE THAT IS INCLUDED AND WHAT PERCENTAGE. I'LL LET HIM TALK ABOUT THAT.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, TOO, IF YOU HAVE

ANYTHING ELSE. >> THANK YOU, TODD.

MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. MY NAME IS CHIP BOYD.

421 CENTURY WAY, RED OAK, TEXAS, WITH JOHN HOUSTON DEVELOPMENT.

I PREPARED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE GARAGE ORIENTATIONS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS. BUT I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO START FROM A LITTLE HIGHER LEVEL AND SAY AS I AM HEARING THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE IS SO MUCH MORE THAN GOES IN TO A QUALITY COMMUNITY THAN THE LOT SIZES OR THE GARAGE ORIENTATIONS. YOU KNOW, I HAVE BEEN DEVELOPING FOR QUITE SOME TIME. I HAVE SEEN ONE-ACRE DEVELOPMENTS IN RAPID FASHION TURN IN TO UNAPPEALING COMMUNITIES THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BE AROUND AND DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN. I HAVE SCENE ZERO LOT LINE COMMUNITIES DONE WELL THAT HAVE THE HIGH QUALITY PROGRAMMING THAT HAVE HIGH QUALITY PRODUCT. THEY ARE LIFE-LONG COMMUNITIES.

WE ARE IN THE BUSINESS OF ESTABLISHING LIFE-LONG COMMUNITIES. SO, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A PAUSE ON FOCUSING ON THE DEVIATION FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON LOT SIZES AND GARAGE ORIENTATIONS AND JUST SPEAK TO QUALITY. JOHN HOUSTON HAS BUILT HOMES IN MIDLOTHIAN FOR A LONG TIME. I BELIEVE THAT THE QUALITY SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. THAT IS SOMETHING WE TAKE A LOT OF PRIDE IN. IT'S SOMETHING WE WANT TO CONTINUE. CANDIDLY AT THE BACK END OF A 12 AND 14-YEAR CYCLE DEALS ARE GETTING HARDER AND HARDER TO COME BY AND HARDER AND HARDER TO MAKE FINANCIAL SENSE.

I WILL SPEAK TO THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM.

WE ARE A FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS AND WE NEED TO MAKE MONEY TO MAKE DEALS WORK. BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE WANT TO ESTABLISH THE QUALITY REGARDLESS OF THE LOT SIZE AND REGARDLESS OF THE ORIENTATION OF THE GARAGE.

SO I WANT TO START WITH THAT. WE ARE A LONG-TERM PLAYER HERE AND WE INTEND TO BE HERE FOR A LONG TIME.

WE ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT.

I HOPE THAT YOU WOULD RECONSIDER THE INITIAL CONVERSATION I HEARD AND HAVE DIALOGUE WITH WHAT THE FUTURE LOOKS WITH 149 NEW FAMILIES HERE VERSUS AN EMPTY FIELD.

WITH THAT I WILL SPEAK TO THE GARAGE ORIENTATIONS.

A LOT OF THE P.D.S THAT HAVE COME THROUGH HAVE REQUESTED 65%.

I KNOW THAT HAS BEEN A BIG TOPIC OF DISCUSSION AS WELL.

OUR GOAL HERE IS TO ALLOW FOR CHOICE.

WE HAVE SIDE-ENTRY WE ARE PROPOSING, J-SWING AND YES, FRONT-ENTRY AS WELL. THE WHOLE GOAL HERE IS TO HAVE DEVIATION ALONG THE STREETSCAPE AND DRIVE-UP APEEP SO IT'S NOT JUST FOUR HOUSE PLANS WITH THE DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS BUT YOU ACTUALLY HAVE THE VARIETY AND THE STREETSCAPE THAT LASTS FOR THE LIFE OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT IS THE REASON WE ARE PROPOSING ALL THREE. WE DID REQUEST 65%.

WE ARE OPEN TO DISCUSSING ANYTHING BECAUSE AS YOU STATE IT IS GOING FROM 0%. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS

BEYOND THAT. >> THE ONLY QUESTIONS I WOULD HAVE WOULD ROTATE THEMSELVES AROUND -- WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD STATE I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU.

I OWN A SERVICE BUSINESS THAT DOES SERVICES ON PROPERTIES THAT ARE ONE-ACRE LOTS. I SEE SOME OF THE SAME THINGS YOU ARE MENTIONING. IT DOES PROVIDE FOR NICE DEVELOPMENT SIZES ESPECIALLY ON AT LEAST -- I'M ONLY SPEAKING FROM MY OWN VIEW. THIS DOES NOT REFLECT UPON THE

COUNCIL, STAFF OR ANYONE ELSE. >> SURE.

>> BUT ON THE SOUTHSIDE OF 287, THE FURTHER WE GET AWAY FROM 287 THE WAY I TYPICALLY VIEWED THIS, THE CLOSER WE NEED TO GET TO THE QUARTER TO HALF ACRE SIZE LOTS. THAT IS 10 TO 20S.

THE CLOSER WE GET DOWN TO MCCAUFIN DOVE CREEK HAS DONE OUTSTANDING JOB TO PROVIDE FOR THAT.

THAT IS A GREAT, GREAT VIEW FROM A BIRD'S-EYE VIEW OF WHAT I LIKE TO SEE. ANOTHER MAIN ISSUE THAT I KIND OF SEE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STYLE, CAN WE GO TO THE SLIDE OF THE SLOT SCALE AS FAR AS THE -- SEE IF WE CAN GO BACK A LITTLE

[00:35:05]

THE ONLY THING I'M KIND OF CONCERNED AS I SEE THIS IS WE ESPECIALLY ON MCCAUPIN, WE HAVE PULLED BACK OFF OF BEING RIGHT UP ON THE ROAD RIGHT HERE. I'M HEARING WALLS.

WALLS WORRY ME BECAUSE I ENVISION GRAND PRAIRIE GOING ON THE GREAT SOUTHWEST. I CALL IT THE GREAT CANYON DRIVE OVER THERE. SO I'M WONDERING WHAT I WANT TO BE LOOKING AT, IF I WANT TO BE LOOKING AT ALL THE WALLS ON EITHER SIDE OF 14TH STREET. OR I WANT TO SEE THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE OPENED UP WITH SOME LANDSCAPING FEATURES POSSIBLY SOME FRONT-ENTRY LIKE WE SEE DOVE CREEK.

I HATE TO KEEP BRINGING THAT UP BUT THEY HAVE DONE OUTSTANDING JOB OVER THERE ON MCCAUPIN ROAD.

YOU SEE THAT WITH THE SETBACK OF THE MCCAUPEN MANOR TO PLAINVIEW. NO DOUBT IN MY MIND LOOKING AT THE HOMES YOU ARE BUILDING THAT THEY ARE OUTSTANDING.

MY FOCUS ON FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES IS WHEN WE MOVE -- THE FURTHER WE MOVE ONCE AGAIN SOUTH, THE LESS FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES I PREFER TO SEE. I WILL TELL YOU RIGHT UP FRONT, I'M NOT ONE THAT WOULD EXPECT YOU TO BUILD 0% FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES. THAT IS NOT FAIR TO YOU AS A

DEVELOPER. >> I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: YOU CAN'T DEVELOP AROUND THAT.

BUT THE FURTHER WE GO SOUTH THE MORE I WILL PULL CLOSER TO THE 0% NUMBER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MAGIC NUMBER HERE IS TO ME. TO ME 50% IS STILL TOO HIGH.

I FEEL THIS IS CROWDED UP ON THE ROADWAY.

I ALSO WANT TO TRY TO BE FAIR. BUT I'M SEEING TOO MANY 72-FOOT WIDE LOTS HERE. ESPECIALLY FOR WHAT I KNOW IS BEHIND THIS. THERE IS A LOT OF TWO TO FOUR-ACRE TRACT HOMES BEHIND THIS.

NOT THAT YOU CAN DO THAT. I DON'T EXPECT YOU TO GET CLOSE.

THIS IS PRETTY TIGHT. >> UNDERSTOOD.

WELL, WE WOULD CERTAINLY ENTERTAIN DISCUSSION OBVIOUSLY WITH PERCENTAGES AND POTENTIALLY ADDITIONAL SETBACKS IF WE HAVE ROOM IN THE DEPTH OF THE PADS. I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR TODD WITHOUT ANALYZING THAT. BUT THESE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK INTO. BECAUSE AGAIN WE ARE EXCITED ABOUT THE PROJECT. WE WANT ONE THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY. SO WE WOULD BE TOTALLY OPEN TO

THOSE THINGS. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: AS LONG AS TODD IS HERE, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR HIM.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT HAS TO DO WITH THE SUBDIVISION BUT THE THOUGHT THAT CAME TO MY MIND LAST WEEK.

WHEN IT COMES TO LOT ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT STYLE.

SOMETHING THAT I HAVEN'T SEEN A LOT OF WHICH KIND OF MADE ME WONDER IF WE ARE HAVING ALL THE PROBLEMS WITH FRONT-ENTRY, J-SWINGS AND NOBODY LIKES TO LOOK AT THE FRONT-ENTRY J-SWING, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DO A REAR-ENTRY J-SWING? TAKE A GARAGE THAT NOBODY LIKES TO SIT ON THE FRONT AND FLIP IT TO THE BACK. YOU HAVE MORE DRIVEWAY AND STILL HAVE A ROOM FOR A PATIO. I DON'T SEE IT A LOT.

BUT IT WOULD APPEAR TO ME IT WOULD BE AN APPLICATION THAT WOULD WORK EVEN POSSIBLY ON A 70-FOOT WIDE LOT.

YES OR NO? >> I BELIEVE WHAT THE BUILDERS DO INSTEAD OF PUTTING IT IN THE BACK IS THE THIRD OPTION HERE THAT YOU SEE WHERE IT'S JUST A SIDE-ENTRY.

THEY DON'T PUT THEM TO THE BACK. THE COST OF THE DRIVE WAY.

ENGINEERING WISE GRADING. NO REASON IT CAN'T BE DONE BUT IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO HAVE IT IN THE FRONT.

THIS IS THE OPTION. YOU CAN SEE THE ELEVATION AS WELL. WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE DOES ALLOW FOR THE SIDE-ENTRY. I BELIEVE THERE IS A 24-FOOT

RADIUS OR SOMETHING. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: YOU CAN GET THAT THIRD OPTION ON THE RIGHT? GET IT ON A 70-FOOT OR CLOSER TO 80-FOOT WIDE?

>> 72. >> 72?

>> IT WILL WORK. >> IT DOES PUSH THE HOUSE TO ONE SIDE. DRIVEWAY SWINGS OPEN.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: WHEN YOU PUSH THE HOUSE TO ONE SIDE,

WHAT IS THE SETBACK? >> IT'S STILL SIX.

72-FOOT WIDE WITH A SIX-FOOT SIDE SO 60-FOOT PAD.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: THAT IS THE SETBACK YOU HAVE ON A 60,

65-FOOT WIDE LOT. >> IT WILL LEAVE YOU 40 TO

42-FOOT PRODUCT. >> CORRECT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: OKAY.

THANK YOU. QUESTION I HAD.

>> AND TO TALK ABOUT THE DEPTH THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER ABOUT BEING OFF THE 14TH STREET, THESE ARE 145-FOOT DEEP. WHICH IS MORE THAN MOST LOTS.

I ALSO DID DOVE CREEK THAT HAS TURNED OUT AMAZING.

SAME BUILDER IN THERE. SAME LOT SIZES.

SAME BASICALLY DEVELOPMENT. THESE THE LOTS ARE DEEPER THAN WHAT WE HAVE IN DOVE CREEK. WE COULD MOVE SETBACK BACK BUT YOU ARE TALKING THE HOUSES CLOSE TO 14TH AND THE WALL.

THE WALL IS REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE.

WE COULD DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. MAYBE WE HAVE AN OPTION FOR

SOMETHING? >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: IS

[00:40:10]

STREET? >> NO.

NOT NECESSARILY. WITH A P.D. YOU CAN PROPOSE ANYTHING. IT'S A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

BUT OUR REQUIREMENT IS HAVE A SIX-FOOT WALL MASONRY WALL WITH A 15-FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER. MEETING THE H.O.A. LAW IT'S MAINTAINED BY THE H.O.A. OR DO A ROD IRON FENCE.

BUT THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE THAT NEEDS THE THE LIVING SCREEN WALL

ADJACENT TO IT. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: IT'S JUST MY TAKE THAT COUNCIL MOVED MORE IN A DIRECTION.

AND DOVE CREEK WAS THE FIRST TO GET CAUGHT UP IN THAT QUICKLY.

>> YES, SIR. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: HAVE A LITTLE FURTHER SETBACK WITH THE TERRAIN ROLL, TREES, SHRUBBERY PLANNING FOR MORE OF A LANDSCAPE TYPE BUFFER VERSUS THE FENCES OR ESPECIALLY BRICK WALLS.

I THOUGHT WE KIND OF ESTABLISHED WHERE WE DIDN'T DESIGNATE ANY CERTAIN STREET WAYS BUT ESPECIALLY ON THE SOUTHSIDE OF 287 ONCE AGAIN, ONCE WE GET DOWN IN THIS RANGE WHERE WE ARE AT, ASHFORD AND SOUTH. I REMEMBER ASHFORD IN THE OPEN CONVERSATIONS LIKE THIS BROUGHT UP KIND OF ACROSS THE BOARD.

WE ARE WANTING TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A DIFFERENT FEEL VERSUS BEING UP IN THE CITY MORE OF AN OPEN FORMAT.

THIS IS A GREAT DEVELOPMENT FOR WHERE WE WERE JUST TALKING A COUPLE OF THE WEEKS AGO WHEN YOU GET AROUND MOCKING BIRD LANE AND THE WALNUT GROVE. 1387 IN WALNUT GROVE.

EAST AND WEST. THIS IS IT.

BUT DOWN WHERE WE ARE AT HERE, THIS IS A DIFFERENT APPLICATION

AS I SEE IT. >> UNDERSTOOD.

>> I WOULD SAY WE WOULD OFFER ADDITIONAL 20 FEET BUFFER THAN WHAT WE ARE SHOWING NOW. DO JUST WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. WE WOULD DO WROUGHT IRON, BERM

AND DIFFERENT SCREEN. >> ARE WE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT

THE BACKS OF THOSE HOUSES? >> WITH THE LIVING SCREEN, EVENTUALLY IT WILL GROW UP SOME. BUT YES, THE SHORT ANSWER IS

YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: I

HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. >> WE ARE OPEN TO EITHER ONE.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF THE FEEL YOU ARE LOOKING FOR.

>> THAT IS WHAT WE ARE PLANNING TO DO ON THE WESTSIDE ALREADY.

WE COULD DO IT ON THE EAST SIDE AS WELL.

>> WEST SIDE OF 14TH. WHERE BLUE LOTS ARE THERE.

WE WERE PROPOSING A WROUGHT IRON FENCE WITH BERM AND TREES THAT IS EVERY 50 FEET AND LANDSCAPING SO IT'S A LIVING SCREEN.

CHIP IS SAYING WE CAN DO THAT ON THE EAST SIDE AS WELL.

WE COULD TAKE THE DEPTH OUT OF THE LOTS.

OBVIOUSLY SPREAD IT OUT THROUGH THERE.

IT WOULDN'T BE JUST THOSE LOTS. IT WOULD BE SHORTER.

WE COULD WORK THAT OUT. BUT ANOTHER 20 FOOT IN THERE TO ALLOW FOR A NICE THREE OR FOUR FOOT BERM.

>> THERE IS NO WAY -- I SEE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

>> YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE DEPTH OF THE FRONT.

DOUBLE SCREEN. >> YOU HAVE A SINGLE LOADED

STREET. >> YOU HAVE A SINGLE LOADED STREET. ALONG 14TH.

>> WE ARE TALKING MORE OF A BUFFER, MORE LANDSCAPE TO MOVE IT AWAY FROM THE ROAD AND HAVE MORE OF A SCREEN.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: IT WILL BE THE SAME FACE YOU WILL

JUST PUSH IT AWAY FROM 14TH. >> IT'S NOT THE SAME FACE.

IT WOULDN'T A BRICK WALL LIKE YOU ARE NOT WANTING.

IT'S A WROUGHT IRON FENCE WITH COLUMNS THAT IS STONE AND

PLANTING AND TREES. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: MY PRIMARY CONCERN, YOU ARE GOING TO BUILD A BEAUTIFUL PRODUCT.

THESE ARE GOING TO BE NICE HOUSES.

MY CONCERN IS WHAT DO THEY LOOK LIKE IN 15 TO 20 YEARS? WHEN I'M LOOKING IN THE BACKS OF PEOPLE'S HOMES.

I KNOW WE HAVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS AND WE HAVE BEEN DOWN THROUGH THESE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW MUCH LEVERAGE DO THEY HOLD DOWN THE ROAD? WE DO SEE WHERE THE STATE HAS MADE SOME IMPROVEMENTS ON THEIR ABILITY TO HOLD LEVERAGE.

BUT THEN THAT IS QUESTIONABLE. ALWAYS HAVE CONCERNS WHEN WE ARE GETTING DOWN IN TO WHAT I DAL OUR OPEN SPACE COUNTRY APPLICATION OF OUR TOWN. WE HAVE GOT THE HOUSES BACKED UP ON THE ROAD. NOW WITH THE WALLS.

WE SAY WELL, WE WILL PUSH THEM BACK 20 FEET AND RUN SOME BERMS BUT WE'LL HAVE THE WROUGHT IRON FENCES SO WE CAN STILL SEE IN BACK OF THEIR HOUSES. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. AT TIME THERE WOULD BE SHRUBS THAT WILL HELP BUT YOU STILL GET SOME OF THAT.

WHEN I GO TO GRAND PRAIRIE AND ARLINGTON AND A LOT OF THE PLACES, IT CAN GET TRASHED UP LOOKING WITH SOME OF THE HOUSES.

THAT IS WHAT CONCERNS ME. HOW DO WE KEEP IT LOOKING FRESH AND CRISP AND CLEAN FROM THE FRONT.

ESPECIALLY ON 14TH. THAT IS OUR, I HAVE ALWAYS

[00:45:02]

SEEING HOW WE ARE PRESENTING OURSELVES.

>> MIKE, ONE THING YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT, I LIVE NEXT TO COTTON WOOD CREEK WITH THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE ALL THE WAY AROUND IT. I WATCHED A ONE LADY WHO SITS OUT AND READS A BOOK EVERY MORNING.

THERE IS NO PRIVACY BACK THERE. ONE GUY TOOK WOOD PANELS FROM HOME DEPOT AND ATTACHED IT TO THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE.

NO STAIN OR ANYTHING ON IT. THE BUSHES DIED.

NOBODY CARES ABOUT IT. IT IS NEVER GOING TO LOOK GOOD.

THE WALL MIGHT LOOK BETTER BUT THE THING IS THERE IS NO REGULATION ON BACK OF HOUSES IN OUR BOOKS.

EVERY ONE OF THOSE HOUSES COULD BE EXACTLY THE SAME FROM THE ROAD. SO I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO PROBABLY DO IN MY OPINION IS WHILE EVERYBODY STILL HAS TIMES TO TALK. I THINK IT NEEDS TO STOP NOW AND GET IT RETOOLED A LITTLE BIT. IF YOU LOOK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD; I AM COMPARING BRANDY RIDGE AND I'M CARING LILY, ROLLING WOOD.

SOME OF THESE WILL NEVER CHANGE HAND.

TWO OR THREE OR FOUR-ACRE LOTS. SOME WILL.

I WON'T SAY THEY WILL NEVER DEVELOP BUT TWO OFF OF ASHFORD.

ONE OF THEM WILL NEVER SELL UNTIL SHE DIES AND THAT COULD BE 20 MORE YEARS OR SO SHE IS SO STUBBORN.

I'M SAYING THERE IS A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL GO ON IN MIDLOTHIAN. THERE ARE TOO MANY HOUSES FOR THAT MANY SQUARE FEET, ACRES OF DIRT.

TO MAKE IT LOOK PRESENTABLE. NO MATTER HOW YOU DO IT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: THE ONLY OTHER THING I WILL MENTION IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOR THAT SIZE LOT DECENT ONE AND A HALF AND THE TWO-STORY HOUSES. SO YOU ARE LOOKING UP AT EVERYTHING. I'M USED TO LOOKING UP WHEN I'M ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TOWN. BUT I AM, ALL OF THOSE REASONS ARE WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. NOT YOUR PRODUCT.

BUT THE PRESENTATION OF WHAT ARE PEOPLE GOING TO SEE WHEN THEY

DRIVE DOWN 14TH. >> SURE.

I UNDERSTAND. OTHER COMMUNITIES WE HAVE OBVIOUSLY REQUIRED 100% MASONRY ON THE HOUSES THAT ARE BACK IN TO A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS AN OPTION AS WELL. BUT NONE OF THE ITEMS HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE LOT SIZES NECESSARILY.

THIS IS GETTING IN MORE DETAILS AND THE NUANCES OF THE CC&R AND

THE DESIGN GUIDELINES. >> MAYOR RENO: I'LL GO BACK TO THE LOT SIZE. I'M SURE YOUR PRODUCT WILL BE AN EXCELLENT PRODUCT. I HAVE NO DOUBT IN THAT.

THIS IS TOO FAR SOUTH. IT'S TOO MUCH DISTANCE.

WE NEED MORE 10S AND 20S IN THERE.

I PERSONALLY WOULD BE HAPPY WITH HALF ACRES.

BUT I'M NOT RIGID ON THAT. THIS IS TOO MUCH DENSITY THIS FAR SOUTH. WE NEED MORE OF A PHASE FROM UP

NORTH TO WHAT IS DOWN SOUTH. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: THE ONLY OTHER THING I'D MENTION THAT I AM THINKING ABOUT.

TODD MIGHT WEIGH IN WHEN WE TALK IS POTENTIAL OF MAYBE NOT HAVING TO GO BACK AS FAR WITH THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO GET A SLIP STREET IN THERE. I KEEP BRINGING THAT COVER CREEK BUT I BELIEVE YOU ENGINEERED THAT, DIDN'T YOU?

>> YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: YOU

DID A GOOD JOB. >> FRONT-FACING, THE SLIP

STREET. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: YEP.

YEP. >> PROVIDE THE SETBACK AT THE

FRONT OF THE HOUSE. >> I THINK BASED ON THE FEEDBACK WE WOULD REQUEST TABLE. WE WILL RECONVENE WITH THE STAFF TO SEE IF WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING TO GATHER MORE

SUPPORT. >> MAYOR RENO: WE WILL

CONTINUE THIS. >> SOUNDS GREAT.

>> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS:

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. >> MAYOR RENO: WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE OPEN HEARING FIRST.

>> MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND TABLE IT TO --

>> AT LEAST A MONTH. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE

THE "HEAR! HEAR!" >> MHERE -- THE PUBLIC HEARING..

THEN Y'ALL HOLD UP. >> NO WORKING.

>> MAYOR RENO: OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE

PUBLIC HEARING SAY AYE. >> AYE.

>> MAYOR RENO: ANY OPPOSED? WE HAVE FOUR TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND ONE ABSTAINING. TABLE OR CONTINUE?

>> SAME THING. >> MAYOR RENO: OKAY.

>> REOPEN -- >> OCTOBER 22.

>> MAYOR RENO: UNTIL OCTOBER 27.

VOTE ON THAT OR JUST SAY THAT? >> MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE

UNTIL OCTOBER 27. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO

[00:50:04]

>> AYE. >> MAYOR RENO: OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES TO CONTINUE THIS UNTIL OCTOBER 27.

GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> IF ALL ELSE FAILS YOU TAP IT, DON'T YOU? [BANGING]

>> BUTTON BROKE ON THIS ONE. >> MAYOR RENO: OKAY.

OPEN ITEM 2020-344, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND

[2020-344]

TRENT? >> THANK YOU.

THIS IS FROM CHANGE OF DEVELOPMENT FOR PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO NORTHERN PORTION TO NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT IS KNOWN AS BRIDGE WATER DEVELOPMENT.

THIS THE LAST YEAR WITH THE CHANGES.

WE HAD A WORKSHOP ON THIS, DISCUSSING THE CHANGES FROM WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED. BACK IN 2019.

THIS CAME TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AFTER THE WORKSHOP THERE WERE VARIOUS THINGS THAT WE WORKED ON WITH THE APPLY CAN'T PRIOR TO COMING TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

WE WERE AGE TO TIE DOWN THIS, AND THE PHASING OF THE PROJECT.

WITH THE STANDARD, THE STREET AND TRAIL SYSTEM.

IN THE AMENITIES WE WERE ABLE TO ALSO DISCUSS MORE SPECIFICS ON THE AMENITIES. TO BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE LARGER DEVELOPMENTS. THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE FEEL WE ARE AT A PLACE WHERE BOTH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IN FRONT OF YOU. WHEN THIS WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 15 IT WAS APPROVED 5-1. BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. ALSO, STAFF MAILED OUT THE NOTICES TO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET.

57 TOTAL NOTICES. ONE CAME BACK IN FAVOR.

ONE CAME IN OPPOSITION. THE PROPERTY THAT WAS IN OPPOSITION WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ON TO WALNUT GROVE ROAD. THEY ARE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE INTERSECTION OF THE HIGHWAY 287.

AND WALNUT GROVE ROAD. THEY WERE REQUESTING THAT SOME SORT OF AN OVERPASS BE CREATED AND SET UP THE LIGHTS.

WE WERE ABLE TO DISCUSS THE CONCERNS WITH THE PERSON IN OPPOSITION. TO GET IN THE SPECIFICS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ONCE AGAIN ONLY FOR THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE FORMER DIAMOND J. PROJECT.

EVERYTHING NORTH OF 287. THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT 278,125 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPING -- 2,125 DWELLING UNITS.

160 BEING TOWN HOUSES. WHAT IS IN YOUR PACKET I HAVE BROKEN DOWN THE EXISTING P.D. OF WHAT IS PERMITTED TODAY AND WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING. SOME OF THE CHANGES MIGHT SEEM FAR OFF BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT OF HOW MANY 88-FOOT WIDE LOTS THEY HAVE, COMPARED TO WHAT WAS PREVIOUS APPROVED, ET CETERA, YOU WOULD SEE THAT THEY WILL HAVE A LOT LARGER LOTS IN COMPARISON. THE OVERALL DENSITY IS BEING LOWERED. THE WAY THE OPEN SPACE IS BEING DESIGNED IS M GOING TO HAVE BETR ACCESSIBILITY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. ONE OF THE CHANGES ONCE AGAIN IS THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH. IN THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE.

IT WAS 50 FEET. PROPOSED P.D. IT RANGES 40 FEET UP DEPENDING ON THE LOT. THERE IS AQUIFE A CAVEAT WITH TE TOWNHOUSES. THEY HAVE A 20-FOOT WIDE LOT WIDTH BUT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH A TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT.

I'LL SAY THAT THE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE ALONG 287. WILL NOT BE THE MAIN ACCESS AT THE U.S. 287 PARKWAY. WILL NOT BE IN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA ON THE WALNUT GROVE ROAD.

IN ADDITION, WITH ONE OF THE MAJOR CONCERNS ABOUT IF YOU RECALL IN THE WORKSON THAT P&Z HAD WHERE THE -- WORKSHOP THAT P&Z HAD THE APPLICANT REQUESTING BY RIGHT AND THERE ARE VARIOUS USES; SUCH AS, RESTAURANTS, GROCERY STORES.

THAT HAS BEEN AMENDED. THE APPLICANT DID GO BACK AND

[00:55:04]

THEY CHANGED QUITE A FEW THINGS. USES WERE ONE OF THEM.

ONE CONCERN ABOUT NOT ONLY FOR USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT, IT WAS WITH THE RECENT LEGISLATION APPROVED BY THE STATE LAST YEAR REGARDING THE BUILDING MATERIALS.

HOW DO WE REGULATE THAT? TIME AND TIME AGAIN NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES THE APPLICANT KEPT THROWING IN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REGARDING THE MASONRY. WE HAD TO KEEP TELLING THEM WE COULDN'T HAVE IT IN THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO TO ENFORCE THAT.

WE HAVE, I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW MANY DRAFTS OF THE ORDINANCE THEY KENT THROWING IT IN THERE AND WE KEPT REMOVING IT.

BUT I DID PROMISE I'D LET YOU KNOW THROUGH THE OTHER MEANS AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND THE OTHER LEGAL DOCUMENTS THEY WILL BE IMPLEMENTING THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, MASONRY, CERTAIN DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT WE CAN NO LONGER ENFORCE AS A CITY.

ONE OF THE OTHER CONCERNS IS THE NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

HOW DO WE, WELL, WE HAVE WORKED REALLY HARD AS A CITY TO PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, GOOD DESIGN.

PURPOSE OF MOST OF THE DESIGNS WHAT WE DO FOR A NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING IS LET THE USER 20 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD CAN STILL USE THE BUILDING AND STILL BE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING.

THAT IS WHY WE HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS IN IN THE ORDINANCES AND WE TRY TO PUSH DEVELOPERS TO BRING THEIR "A" GAME TO THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN. WITH THAT, AND THROUGH TALKING WITH THE DEVELOPER, ONE THING WE CAME UP WITH IS ALL NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, EVEN IF IT DOES NOT REQUIRE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT OR ANY ADDITIONAL CHANGES IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THEY BE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH A DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN PROCESS.

SIMILAR TO THE OTHER NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WE HAVE IN THE CITY THAT HAVE IMPROVED.

TO BE REQUIRED TO TAKE THE SITE PLAN AND THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS BEFORE THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION.

UPON RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO BRING IT FORTH TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FINAL APPROVAL.

THAT WILL ALLOW THE CITY THE ABILITY TO HELP GUIDE DESIGN AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NONRESIDENTIAL PRODUCT WITHIN THIS DEVELOPMENT. AS YOU CAN SEE, MAJOR PORTION OF THE PROJECT ALONG 287, MAJOR VIEW SHED IN THE CITY.

ONE OF THE ENTRANCE POINTS OF THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN WHERE TRAFFIC AS YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED LATELY TRAVELS THROUGH.

THAT SOMETHING THEY WILL BE VIEWING FREQUENTLY.

SO THIS IS SOMETHING WE ARE HIGHLY CONCERNED ABOUT AS WELL.

THERE IS QUITE A BIT THAT I COULD TALK ABOUT.

THE PHASING WAS ANOTHER CONCERN AT THE WORKSHOP.

I WON'T TALK A LOT. I WILL LEAVE IT OPEN FOR THE QUESTIONS. I THINK YOU HAVE HEARD IT TIME AND TIME AGAIN. PHASING WE WERE ABLE TO NAIL DOWN TO MORE SPECIFICS BASED OFF OF ONCE THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IS DOES IN THE PHASE OR THE AREA FINAL PLATTED THEY HAVE DAYS TO COMPLETE AMENITIES IN THE AREA.

THEN ON THE COMMUNITY AMENITY CENTER, THEY HAVE SO MANY DAYS AFTER THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE COMPLETED.

THEN THEY HAVE BEFORE SO MANY BUILDING PERMITS ARE ISSUED.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. THE ONCE AGAIN THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT

THAT TIME. >> MAYOR RENO: GO BACK TO THE SITE LAYOUT SCREEN, THE SECOND PAGE.

I'M SORRY. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, EVERYTHING ON THERE BUT ONE WENT THE WRONG DIRECTION.

>> LET ME BRING UP -- >> MAYOR RENO: IS THIS THE SAME THING WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE WORKSHOP?

>> IT IS. >> MAYOR RENO: SO CONVINCE ME THAT THIS IS THE SAME THING THAT WE -- BECAUSE EVERYTHING ON THAT IS GONE TO WHAT I CONSIDER THE WRONG DIRECTION.

>> WHAT AT FIRST I WAS SHOWING ARE THE MINIMUMS.

THE SMALLEST LOTS. >> MAYOR RENO: I KNOW BUT

EVERY ONE OF THOSE -- >> THAT IS WHY I HAVE THIS ONE RIGHT HERE TO SHOW DIFFERENT PRODUCT TYPES AND THE DIFFERENT RANGES. WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THEY WILL HAVE THE SEVEN PRODUCT TYPE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL.

RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT TYPE ONE THROUGH SIX AND THE TOWNHOUSES.

PRODUCTS ONE IS 100 FEET WIDE. APPROXIMATELY 15,000 SQUARE FEET. PRODUCT TYPE TWO, 80, 10,000.

PRODUCT TYPE THREE, 70/8,4000. PRODUCT TYPE FOUR, 60/7,200.

SO THAT THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED BEFORE IS THE PRODUCT TYPE SIX TO HAVE A TOTAL NUMBER OF THE LOTS OF 144.

MAXIMUM NUMBER THEY CAN DO. WHEN I COMPARED THE TWO DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EXISTING P.D. AND THE PROPOSED P.D., THE WORST CASE SCENARIOS THAT IS WHAT I TRIED TO DO.

OVERALL IF YOU ARE TO COMBINE ALL OF THE 20S, 40S, 50S

[01:00:01]

>> MAYOR RENO: YOU JUST DIDN'T SPECIFY THE SIZE?

>> IN THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE? THEY SPECIFIED IT BUT DUE TO

COURT RULING -- >> MAYOR RENO: I KNOW THE

NUMBERS THEY HAD. >> THEY SPECIFIED RIGHT HERE.

MAXIMUM NUMBER THEY COULD HAVE IS THE 1,260 OF THE TYPE ONE LOTS. 50-FOOT WIDE LOTS.

APPROXIMATELY 50 TO 100 SQUARE FOOT IN SIZE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR BIGGEST SIZE IN THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE TYPE 4, YOU WILL HEAR WORST CASE -- I MEAN, THE MINIMUM SIZ-

>> MAYOR RENO: WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO MY MEMORY IS COMPARED TO WHAT WE DID IN THE LAST WORKSHOP.

IS THIS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE PRESENTED IN THE LAST WORKSHOP?

>> YES. >> REMEMBER, WE WENT FROM 2011.

>> -- 2100. >> IF YOU LOOK AT THE PERCENTAGE NUMBERS THEY WERE BETTER. WE WERE HOG TIED IN TO THIS 3 1/2. WE DON'T HAVE MUCH OF A CHOICE.

I HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS BEFORE LAWYERS GOT FINISHED WITH IT. I'M READY TO SEE THIS DONE AND

GET STARTED WITH IT. >> MAYOR RENO: ALL RIGHT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: LET'S GO BACK TO THE OVERVIEW, WITH THE MULTICOLORED LOTS. SO MAYOR, GOING BACK TO WHAT WE LOOKED AT WHEN WE HAD 50-FOOT WIDE LOTS, THERE WAS A LOT MORE CONSUMPTION OF ALL OF THIS GREEN.

THAT IS THE PROBLEM. THAT IS THE TRADEOFF.

AS YOU SAW A MOMENT AGO, AS YOU KNOW I'M NOT A FAN OF THE 40-WIDE LOTS AND DEFINITELY NOT A FAN OF THE 20-WIDE FOOT LOTS.

I CAN SEE THE BENEFIT OF WHAT THEY HAVE DONE.

BECAUSE WHEN WE HAD THE 50-FOOT WIDE LOTS AND THE LOT NUMBERS WENT WAY UP. THEY REDUCED THE NUMBER OF THE LOTS. BECAUSE OF THE SITUATION WE HAVE BEEN IN FROM YEARS AGO IT'S LIKE WHAT THEY SAID.

I DON'T REALLY KNOW IF IT CAN BE -- AND THE AMENITY SIDE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE OUTSTANDING.

WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE. I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT THERE IS NOTHING CHANGED IN THE LAW. ON THE TOWNHOME SIDE, THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW SOME TYPE OF THE SINGLE OWNERSHIP ON THE MAJORITY OR ALL THE TOWNHOMES.

>> YEAH. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP IS WHAT I LIKE.

WE CAN'T DO THAT? >> I WOULD REFER TO THE ATTORNEY

FOR THAT. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: I KNOW WE CAN'T UNLESS A LAW CHANGED.

>> THE ONE THING I KEEP THINKING ABOUT NO MATTER HOW MUCH I MAY LOVE OR HATE THIS THING, THIS IS A LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT.

IN EVERY SINGLE THING BUILT, WE HEARD FROM JOHN HOUSTON HE SAID IT'S MARKET-DRIVEN. SO HE MAY GET THAT FIRST SECTION DONE WITH THE AMENITY CENTER AND THEN THE HUMAN POPULATION DECIDES THEY WANT ONE-ACRE LOTS. HE PUTS CHANGES IN.

HE WILL START MAKING ONE-ACRE LOTS.

HE CAN ALWAYS GO UP. HE JUST CAN'T GET THEM ANY SMALLER. I'M JUST SAYING.

YOU HAVE TO THINK BECAUSE FROM THE MOMENT HE TURNS THE FIRST BIT OF DIRT TO THE LAST THING THAT IS BUILT, IT MIGHT BE 20 YEARS. IT MIGHT BE.

MIGHT BE. MIGHT BE.

>> MAYOR RENO: IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE, JUSTIN?

>> MAYOR PRO TEM COFFMAN: I'M LIKE YOU, I GOT QUITE A FEW PHONE CALLS OVER THE DEVELOPMENT OVER THE YEARS.

I'M ONE OF THE NEWER GUYS UP HERE.

YOU HAVE BEEN INVOLVED LONGER THAN I HAVE.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT FOR RECORD THIS HAS BEEN AN EXTREMELY LONG PROCESS. GETTING TO THIS POINT TONIGHT.

THERE IS A CURRENT P.D. OUT THERE THAT WAS APPROVED.

DO YOU KNOW THE YEAR? >> 2015.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM COFFMAN: 2015.

IT DOESN'T BRING NEAR THE QUALITY OF WHAT WE ARE GETTING HERE TONIGHT WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.

THROUGH YEARS AND YEARS OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETINGS, WORKSHOPS, CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THE COMBINATION WITH THE CITY STAFF AND GOING BACK AND FORTH AND DEMANDING A HIGH QUALITY PRODUCT WITH A GREAT DEVELOPER THAT GOT US TO THIS POINT. I WANT TO SORT OF EARMARK THIS POINT IN THE VIDEO SO I CAN REFER PEOPLE DO IT WHEN THEY SAY YOU APPROVED 2100 HOMES QUICKLY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT

THAT HAS BEEN A LONG PROCESS. >> THIS IS THE THIRD MAYOR TO SIT IN ON THE MEETING ABOUT THESE HOMES.

>> I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, I BELIEVE I DEALT WITH THIS I WANT

[01:05:03]

>> I CAN IMAGINE. >> I CAN TELL YOU.

I STARTED, I CAME TO WORK IN 2007 AND THEY KNOW THEY WERE

DEALING WITH IT BEFORE THAT. >> THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR 12

YEARS NOW. >> MAYOR RENO: JUSTIN MAKES MANY EXCELLENT POINT BUT ONE IS THE QUALITY PROJECT.

WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF LATITUDE TO WORK WITH.

THINGS THAT PREDATED US DICTATED IN THE CITY WHAT HAD TO HAPPEN.

WE PROBABLY HAVE MADE THE BEST OF THE MOMENT.

STAFF HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB. DOES ANYBODY WANT TO CLOSE THE

OPEN PORTION? >> I HAVE QUESTIONS.

>> SURE. >> THAT IS FINE.

TRYING TO REMEMBER FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF THEM. WE TALK ABOUT THE DENSITY AND IT USED TO BE 3.5 UNITS FOR AN ACRE AND THEY CAME OFF THAT.

CAME OFF THE LOT SIZE. I CANNOT REMEMBER BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE KEPT ARGUING ABOUT THE TOWN HOME SECTION PUT THEM OVER THE AMOUNT OF THE DENSITY THAT WE AGREED TO OR IS TOWN

HOME SECTION NOT PART OF THAT? >> THE DENSITY IS A LITTLE MORE COMPLEX DUE TO HOW THE ORDINANCE RAN.

IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE THE AMOUNT OF THE LOTS THAT THEY HAD IN THE ORDINANCE COMPARED TO WHAT THE COURT ORDERED DIDN'T MATCH UP. THERE IS DEFINITELY DISCREPANCY FROM WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAID AND WHAT WAS ALLOWED.

HOW THEY EXPLAIN DENSITY IN THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE HAD TO DO WITH THE FLOODPLAINS, EASEMENT AND THERE IS LANGUAGE WE DON'T REALLY USE AND THE WAYS THAT WE DETERMINE DENSITY.

HOW IT IS CALCULATED IN THIS ORDINANCE IS NOT HOW WE CALCULATED. I WILL LET THE APPLICANT GO AHEAD AND SPEAK ON THE DENSITY PORTION OF THIS.

>> GOOD EVENING. BEN, PROPERTY COMPANY 3001 KNOCKS STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS. GOOD TO SEE ALL Y'ALL AGAIN.

I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS. IT HAS BEEN A LONG PROCESS.

WE ARE EXCITED THAT WE ARE HERE. I WANT TO THANK STAFF WORKING WITH US. IT'S BEEN A GOOD RELATIONSHIP SO FAR. OBVIOUSLY WE HOPE TO CONTINUE THAT. I THINK IT WILL BE A GREAT PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY. AS FAR AS THE DENSITY GOES.

WE DID A CALCULATION BASED ON HOW WE CALCULATE DENSITY AND I THINK IT'S HOW Y'ALL CALCULATE DENSITY.

THIS IS 966 ACRES OF TRACT. THE FLOODPLAIN IS 110 ACRES.

THE EASEMENTS ARE THE 13.4 ACRES SO THAT IS NON-USABLE LAND OUT OF THAT. THE NET USABLE AND TAKE OUT THE COMMERCIAL AREA AND THE INDUSTRIAL AREA.

YOU HAVE 776 USABLE ACRES FOR RESIDENTIAL.

JUST RESIDENTIAL. IF YOU TAKE 2125 HOMES, ALL THE SINGLE FAMILY PLUS TOWNHOME GET YOU TO 2.8 UNITS PER NET ACRE.

WHICH IS WELL BELOW THE 3.5. >> I HAD A SECOND QUESTION FOR STAFF OR FOR YOU. WE NEVER HAD A SUBDIVISION WITH THIS MUCH GREEN SPACE BEFORE. SO MY CONCERN IS LIKE THE LAWSON FARMS WHERE THE DEVELOPER DIDN'T DO THE SIDEWALK IS THE MAINTENANCE. OF ALL OF THIS.

I KNOW THERE ARE COMMUNITY PARKS AND IT TALKS ABOUT IT BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CALL THIS FLOOD AREA AND HOW IT WILL BE

MAINTAINED. >> SO, OPEN SPACE IN ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENTS IS AMENITY. IF YOU DON'T KEEP IT UP, IT'S NOT AN AMENITY FOR THE RESIDENTS.

SOME OF THIS IS THE QUARTER LAND OF THE UNITED STATES.

YOU CAN'T GET IN THERE. MITIGATION AND ALL THAT STUFF WITHOUT DOING IT. WHAT WE TEND TO DO IS WHERE WE HAVE THE TRAILS GOING THROUGH THE WOODS HERE, YOU KNOW TREES ARE AMAZING. SO WE INTENT TO HAVE THE NATURAL PATH GOING THROUGH THERE WITH, THE FIRST THING WE GET THROUGH THERE BRUSH HOG THE ENTIRE THING.

GET TREES DEAD OUT OF THERE. CLEAN IT ALL UP.

BUT YOU DON'T MAINTAIN THAT EXCEPT FOR TEN OR 20 FEET ON EITHER SIDE TO KEEP CRITTERS FROM THE TRAIL IF YOU WILL.

THEN CERTAIN AREAS ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE STREET WHERE THERE IS NOT A TRAIL IT WILL BE MANICURED WITH GRASS AND IRRIGATION FOR A WHILE. AND THEN GO BACK TO NATIVE.

DON'T LET NATIVE OUT OF CONTROL. TYPICALLY THAT IS TWICE A YEAR.

THERE ARE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT IS 20 FEET AND FLOODPLAIN AND THE CREEKS. WE GO FURTHER IN THAT TO MAKE SURE ALL THAT, THAT IT CONTINUES TO BE AN AMENITY BUT NOT A

NUANCE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> COUNCILMEMBER WICKLIFFE:

THAT IS COVERED BY THE H.O.A.? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> COUNCILMEMBER WICKLIFFE: I WASN'T SURE IF THERE WERE THE SEPARATE H.O.A. FOR THE POCKET COMMUNITIES.

>> NO. THIS IS ALL ONE H.O.A.

IF WE DECIDE TO GET A ANYTHING T WOULD BE A SUB H.O.A. OF THE

[01:10:09]

>> IT'S PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. NOT COMMON OWNERSHIP.

THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU SEE TODAY.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPERTIES THE HOMEOWNERS OWN THAT -- THAT YOU SEE IN THAT SUBDIVISION.

>> ON THE TOPIC OF THE TREES, YOU PLAN TO TRY TO SAVE AS MANY OF THE ESTABLISHED TREES AS POSSIBLE?

>> ABSOLUTELY. WE HAVE BEEN OUT THERE ON SITE WITH THE PLANNER AND ENGINEER. STAKED A MAJOR DRIVEWAY, MAJOR ROAD AS YOU COME IN. THERE IS A REAL BIG SWATH OF THE TREES ON OFFENSE LINE HERE THAT WE ARE STUDYING AND TREE SURVEYING TO TRY TO INCORPORATE THE TREES IN THE BIG OPEN SPACE, THE BIG PROMENADE WE HAVE. BEFORE WE START TO DO GRADING, ESTABLISHING WHERE THOSE ARE TO DESIGN ROADS AROUND THOSE TO PRESERVE THOSE. TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, YES.

TREES THAT CAN LOOK SICK OR THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT THERE ARE BIG OAKS IN THERE THAT ARE, WE WILL DEFINITELY PRESERVE.

>> IS THERE ANY CONCERN FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, I KNOW WE HAVE A PLAN TO HELP OUT WITH TRAFFIC ON THE WALNUT ROAD GROVE WITH THE EXPANSION THERE BUT IS THERE A CONCERN ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ALONG PRESIDENTIAL OVER THERE --

>> 287. RIGHT HERE.

>> THIS IS ANOTHER AREA WE HAVE HAD MANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT.

WE FEEL LIKE WE ARE TO A POINT THAT OUR PLAN THROUGH AGREEMENTS WE ARE MAKING WITH THE DEVELOPMENT TO BUILD SERVICE, SERVICE ROADS. IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. WHERE IT WOULD HELP TO HELP

ADDRESS TRAFFIC ISSUES. >> DEVELOPER DOES?

>> IT WILL BE A JOINT EFFORT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER.

>> SO WE PLAN HOPEFULLY DO WITH CONSTRUCTION --

>> SHOW ME WHERE THE WHAT THE T WHATABURGER.

>> WE WANT TO CONNECT IT BACK TO THE PRESIDENTIAL PARKWAY.

HOPEFULLY SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

OF COURSE AS THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPS OUT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO

SOMETHING THERE. >> PLAN FOR WALNUT GROVE SHOULD SUFFICE ON THAT ON THE WEST SIDE.

HELP ON THE FUNDING WALNUT GROVE.

>> CORRECT. >> MY LAST QUESTION FOR THE DEVELOPER. I SEE YOU GUYS HAD YOUR FUN EARLIER. I SEE YOU HAVE A SCHOOL SITE.

ARE YOU HAVING A SCHOOL SITE FOR MIDLOTHIAN HERE?

>> IT'S PART OF THE PRESENTATION.

YOU CAN SEE THIS LITTLE BLACK DASHED LINE THERE.

SO THAT REPRESENTS A MIDLOTHIAN, ONE OF THE MIDLOTHIAN SITES THAT THEY CAN SELECT. WE HAVE MET WITH THEM.

ACTUALLY THEY PREFER THAT THERE. THE BLUE SITE WAXAHACHIE IS A PLACE-HOLDER. THEY HAVEN'T DECIDED WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH IT. WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE YEAR THAT WE HAVE OWNED IT, WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF WORK ON IT.

THE FLOOD STUDY IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS WE DUD.

WE REALITIES THAT THE FLOODPLAIN THAT FEMA SHOWS ON THE MAP IS INCORRECT. THAT IS GREAT.

BECAUSE IT'S A LOT SMALL SORE THE BLUE AREA BECAME USABLE.

WE ARE NOT PUTTING MORE LOTS ON IT.

THAT IS WHY WE HAVE MORE OPEN SPACE THAT IS USABLE AND EVERYTHING ELSE. WE DIDN'T INCREASE ANYTHING.

THAT IS A PLACEHOLDER. IF THE SCHOOL DOESN'T WANT THAT IT CAN BE ANOTHER PARK OR BALL FIELDS, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

>> MAYOR RENO: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING?

>> MAKE A MOTION TO CHOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SECONDED. >> MAYOR RENO: WITHOUT WAYNE WE ARE LOST. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

IT'S WORKING AGAIN! >> WORKING AGAIN!

[INAUDIBLE] >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND? PLEASE VOTE. [VOTING]

ITEM PASSES 5-0. >> THANK YOU, GUYS.

>> LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU. >> I'M DICK LE BLANC WITH THE

[01:15:04]

HANOVER PROPERTY COMPANY. >> MAYOR RENO: LET ME OPEN THE

ITEM FIRST. >> NO, HE WANTS TO --

>> I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU.

I'M WITH HANOVER PROPERTY COMPANY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONFIDENCE. WE ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS.

IT WILL BE A LONG PROJECT. IT DEPENDS WHERE THE UP CYCLE IS IN THERE BUT WE ARE COMMITTED TO IT.

LONG-TERM DEVELOPER AND WE INTEND TO DELIVER.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU OVER THE YEARS BECAUSE IT

WILL BE OVER THE YEARS. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[2020-345]

TEMPORARY BLACH PLANTS. >> THANK YOU.

I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT 2020-345 AND ALSO THE NEXT ITEM 2020-346.

THEY HAVE, THEY DEAL WITH THE SAME ITEM.

SO, WE DON'T HAVE TO PRESENT TWICE.

CAN THEY MAKE A MOTION ON BOTH? >> YEAH.

WE'LL -- PUT THEM BOTH TOGETHER. >> OKAY.

SO, WHAT STAFF HAS DONE OVER THE YEARS SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE.

WE TRY TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS MORE SMOOTH. TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO ELIMINATE UNNECESSARY STEPS OF THINGS S WE HAVE SEEN THROUGH TE ANALYSIS AND HOW THE CODES RUN. THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PROCESSES. IF YOU RECALL SECONDARY DWELLING IS SOMETHING WE AMENDED. IF THEY MEET MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS YOU CAN DO A SECONDARY DWELLING BY RIGHT.

ANOTHER ONE THAT WE BROUGHT THAT WE STILL HAVE A CONCERN IS THE TEMPORARY BATCH PLANTS. I DID RESEARCH ANALYSIS GOING BACK TO 2012 WE HAVE DONE APPROXIMATELY 30 CASES FOR THE TEMPORARY BATCH PLANTS. TEMPORARY BATCH PLANTS IS WHERE THEY TAKE THE PLANTS ON SITE OR CLOSE TO USE TOWARD THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE TO BUILD. IT ALLOWS FOR LESS TRUCKS TO TRAVEL THERE. IT'S MORE EFFICIENT.

IT SEEMS WE HAVE LESS ISSUES WITH THEM.

IT'S BEEN ESSENTIAL WITH MOST DEVELOPMENTS WE HAVE HAD HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN. I HAVE GONE BACK TO 2012, YOU WENT TO 2012, WE HAVE HAD 30 CASES WHICH ALL OF THEM ARE APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. A LOT OF THEM ARE DONE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. PRIOR TO THE ORDINANCE I HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, THE AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE AMENDMENT TO THE CODE ORDINANCE, THERE WERE NO REGULATIONS IN PLACE OTHER THAN WHAT THE STATE REQUIRED.

WHICH IS PRETTY VAGUE. REGULATIONS THAT WOULD COME BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL EACH TIME A RESOLUTION BROUGHT BEFORE YOU WERE REGULATIONS THAT THE STAFF CAME UP WITH OVER THE YEARS. WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS LOOKED AT THE REGULATIONS AND WHAT THE VARIOUS STATE AGENCIES AND THE FEDERAL AGENCIES REQUIRE AND WE INCORPORATE THAT TO SECTIONS 6 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. THE FIRST IS FOR THE ZONING ORDINANCE. WE ARE REQUESTING THAT A TEMPORARY BATCH PLANT PERMITTED BY RIGHT IF THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENT SET CODE IN THE ORDINANCE SECTION 6.

SOME ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE SEEN IN EVERY BATCH PLANT THAT GOING AS FAR BACK AS I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TELL, IT ADDRESSES THINGS; SUCH AS, WHEN THEY CAN OPERATE THE BATCH MONT.

HOW CLOSE THEY CAN BE TO A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE RESIDENCE. ONE THING WE DID CHANGE BECAUSE WE FOUND IT IMPORTANT IS THAT THE CITY MANAGER WILL BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE OUTSIDE OF THE HOURS OF OPERATION.

THE REASON FOR THAT IS THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHERE DUE TO VARIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES ON A SATURDAY THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO KEEP ON GOING TO MEET THE DEADLINES, ET CETERA.

WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ALLOW THEM TO WORK BECAUSE THEY ARE OUTSIDE OF THE 7:00 A.M. TO THE 7:00 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY.

SO ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS WE LIKE TO ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER THAT AUTHORIZATION TO ALLOW FOR A DEVELOPER TO WORK OUTSIDE OF THOSE HOURS OF THE OPERATION LISTED.

STUFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROSED REQUEST.

I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS. PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING ON 345.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND IT. PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM IS CLOSED. COMMENTS?

>> GLAD TO HEAR THAT YOU DO HAVE SOME PROVISIONS.

IT USED TO RUN A BATCH PLANT IN THE EARLY '90S.

[01:20:01]

IT'S COMMON IN THE SUMMER. THAT IS ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS EVEN IF THEY ARE CLOSE TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT THAT Y'ALL HAD THE PROVISIONS IN THERE TO RARELY OUT OF THE GUIDELINES IF YOU DON'T HAVE THEM, IT WILL DRIVE PEOPLE CRAZY. GOOD THINKING ON Y'ALL'S PART.

>> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR RENO: WE HAVE A

MOTION FOR ITEM 345. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: APPROVE 345 PRESENTED. SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. [VOTING] ITEM PASSES 5-0. GOING TO 346 UNDER THE REGULAR

[2020-346]

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0.

>> I APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR RENO: PRESSING ON UNTIL SOMEBODY SAYS UNCLE.

[2020-347]

>> NO PRESENTATION? >> PRESENTED BY -- WE COULD DRAW OUT OF A HAT OR SOMETHING.

>> MY APOLOGIES, COUNCIL. UNFORTUNATELY YOU WILL BE STUCK WITH ME FOR A FEW IN A ROW. APOLOGIZE STARTING OFF IN A BAD

ONE. >> GO QUICKLY, THEN.

>> I WILL DO MY BEST. THE FIRST ITEM DEALING WITH THE SPEED LIMITS. THERE ARE COMPLETION OF NEW ROADS, ONE IS SUNBEAM LANE SOUTH OF THE NEW MIDDLE SCHOOL AS WELL AS THE NEW ROADS THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT FOR THE METHODIST SYSTEM.

EXTENSION OF SILKEN CROSSING, METHODIST WAY, GE DON FLOYD DRI.

WE NEED TO ESTABLISH SPEED LIMITS.

THIS ESTABLISHES SPEED LIMIT ON EACH OF THE ROADS AT 35 MILES PER HOUR CURRENTLY. WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SPEEDS THAT ARE ON BOTH SUTTUS AND LED STONE LANE IN AREAS AS WELL AS GEORGE HOPPER IS 35. 14TH IS LITTLE BIT HIGHER IN SPEED. INITIALLY ONE TO ESTABLISH THEM AT THE 35. IF WE NEED TO WE CAN COME BACK AND DO A SPEED STUDY AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS NECESSARY.

WE ALSO HAVE THE TWO SCHOOL SPEED ZONES.

ONE ALONG SILKEN CROSSING, WHICH WOULD BE THE 20 MILES PER HOUR BEGINNING FROM GEORGE HOPPER NORTH OF THE METHODIST WAY, BACK TO SUN BEAM. SO IT WOULD BE 20 MILES PER HOUR IN THE DESIGNATED SCHOOL TIMES. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR RENO: 14TH STREET?

>> I BELIEVE IT'S 40. >> 45, 50.

>> NO, NO. >> MAYOR RENO: NOT SINCE I

HAVE BEEN MAYOR. >> 347.

>> I WILL MAKE A COMMENT THAT THE TRAFFIC FLOW AROUND DIETRICK MIDDLE SCHOOL IS AMAZING. I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A NIGHTMARE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S COVID AND THE FACE-TO-FACE LEARNING VERSUS THE VIRTUAL BUT IT'S BEEN AWESOME. GOOD PLANNING.

>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE WORKED WELL WITH THE SCHOOL. NICE TO HAVE ABILITY TO START QUEUING. THERE IS A GOOD AREA FOR THE VEHICLES TO QUEUE IN THE MIDDLE SCHOOL AS WELL.

>> 35 IS DEFAULT SPEED LIMIT. CORRECT?

FOR THE CITY? >> NO, SIR.

THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ONES SO THE PRIMA FASCIA SPEED LIMIT IN URBAN IS 30 MILES PER HOUR. IF YOU'RE OUTSIDE THE URBAN IT'S

60 MILES PER HOUR. >> 30?

>> YES, SIR. LOCAL STREETS MOSTLY ARE THE URBAN DISTRICTS IT'S 30 MILES PER HOUR.

YOU CAN GO, THE MINIMUM YOU CAN GO, SET IT AT 25 MILES PER HOUR.

BUT IT'S SET FOR THE CERTAIN TYPES OF STREETS.

THE THING YOU HAVE TO DO ON THAT, YOU HAVE TO DO A REPORT EVERY YEAR TO SHOW THAT THE REDUCTION HAS REDUCED ACCIDENTS.

AND THE NUMBER OF TICKETS AND THE WARNINGS.

THE LEGISLATURE ALLOWS YOU TO PUT IT TO 25.

BUT THEY WANT TO PUT A CAVEAT SO IT'S NOT UTILIZED FOR WRITING THE TICKETS AND THE THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

[VOTING] PASSES.

IT PASSES 4-0. I DIDN'T SEE MIKE SNUCK OUT.

[01:25:10]

[2020-348]

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. AS PART OF THE PHASE THREE AND FOUR OF THE GROVE, LOCATED HERE. IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW.

INSTEAD OF HAVING TO PUT IN A LIST STATION THAT WOULD BE THERE INDEFINITELY AND MAINTENANCE COST AND THE ELECTRICAL COST AS WELL THE DEVELOPER IS WORKING TO PUT IN A GRAVITY SEWER LINE THAT COMES TO THE SOUTH, CROSSES 287 AND TIES IN THE EXISTING 24-INCH GRAVITY LINE THAT IS LOCATED HERE ALONG THE SHADY GROVE ROAD.

AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT 4200 LINEAR FEET OF THE 12-INCH GRAVITY LINE THAT IS APPROXIMATELY $600,000 IN COST.

IT DOES CORE SPOT TO THE IMPACT MAP.

THIS IS A 12-INCH LINE THAT FALLS CLOSELY TO ALIGNMENT PROPOSED BY THE DEVELOPER. THIS WILL ALSO PROVIDE SERVICE TO THE VILLAGES AT THE WALNUT GROVE AND PORTION OF THE REDDEN FARMS, AS WELL AS PHASE THREE AND FOUR AND ALSO PHASE FIVE OF THE GROVE. SO FROM A STANDPOINT OF IMPACT FEE, OFFSET OR CREDITS WITH THE COST OF BEING $600,000 WHICH WILL BE VERIFIED BY STAFF. THE ORDINANCE OR THE AMENDMENT OR THE AGREEMENT IS WRITTEN SUCH THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE REIMBURSED $250,000 FROM THE IMPACT FEES THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE ON HAND. REMAINING $350,000, UP TO $350,000 WOULD BE REIMBURSED OVER TIME.

AS THE CITY COLLECTS THE BUILDING PERMITS FOR THE PHASE THREE AND FOUR OF THE GROVE. THAT WOULD BE AS THE BUILDING PERMITS COME IN AND SANITARY SEWER IMPACT FEES ARE COLLECTED THE CITY WOULD HOLD THEM AND MAKE REIMBURSEMENTS TO THE DEVELOPER. FROM A STANDPOINT OF CHEN THIS WAS DEVELOPED AS THE IMPACT, THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE LINE WERE MORE THAN WHAT THE COST IS GOING THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

[VOTING] ITEM PASSES 5-0.

ITEM 2020-349, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AWARDING A CONTRACT TO N.G.

[2020-349]

>> THANK YOU. THIS ELEVATED STORAGE TANK BUILT IN 2005. IT'S BEEN MAINTAINED OVER THE YEARS. SO DIVER GOES IN AND IF THEY REPAIRS ARE NEEDED IT'S MADE AT THAT TIME OR AFTER THE INSPECTION. NORMAL TIME FRAME IS ABOUT 10 YEARS THAT YOU END UP DOING REHAB ON THE ELEVATED STORAGE TANKS. WE HAVE HAD 15 YEARS ON THIS.

IT'S STILL IN REALLY GOOD CONDITION.

WE NEED TO DO MAINTENANCE ON THE OUTSIDE WHICH WOULD INCLUDE A NEW COATING ON THE ACTUAL TANK BOWL.

CLEANING OF THE PEDESTAL. WE WOULD DO A MIXER.

THERE IS NOT A MIXER. WE OWN THE MIXER.

THEY WILL INSTALL MIXER AS PART OF THE PROJECT.

L.E.D. LIGHTING INSIDE OF THE FACILITIES.

INSIDE OF THE TANK PEDESTAL. RIGHT NOW IT'S PRETTY DARK AND HARD TO SEE. THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE STORE INSIDE THERE. THEY WILL FURNISH CHLORINE ANALYZER. WE HAD ALTERNATE BID.

ONE IS REPLACE LIGHTING FOR THE EXTERIOR AND HAVE LIGHTING FOR THE PEDESTAL AND THE TANK. SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE ON NINTH STREET. IT MUST HAVE BEEN CONCLUSION.

IF YOU LOOK WITHIN THE PACKETS WE HAVE THE ALTERNATE PRICING AND THEY RANGED FROM $40,000 $50,000 TO THE $300,000.

WE ALSO HAD AS AN ALTERNATE TO RECOAT $3 MILLION GROUND STORAGE TANK AT THE AGER PLANT. TO SEE WHAT THE PRICES LOOKED LIKE. THERE WAS CONFUSION BECAUSE THE PRICES WERE ALL OVER THE PLACE AS WELL.

RIGHT NOW THE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND WE GO WITH THE ALTERNATE. BUT WE GO WITH THE BASE BID OF THE N.G. PAINTING FOR THE $202,900.12 WITH THE $25,000 CONTINGENCY. THIS IS A BUDGETED ITEM.

WE HAVE MONEY BUDGETED FOR THE WORK.

[01:30:02]

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE.

>> PAINT SCHEME MATCH THE ONE ON THE 9TH STREET?

LOOK THE SAME? >> IT WILL -- ACTUALLY, WE'LL DO THE SAME THING. TOUCHING UP WITH WHAT IS THERE NOW. WE WOULDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING ON

THE EXTERIOR FROM THE COLORS. >> ONE THING I LIKE ABOUT THE CEDAR HILL THEY BRAG ABOUT THE STATE CHAMPIONSHIPS THEY HAVE WON ON THE WATER TOWER. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE DOWN

THAT. >> WE CAN DO THAT IF WE GET ONE.

>> NOT MANY STATE CHAMPIONSHIPS TO BRAG ABOUT.

>> HERITAGE HAS STATE CHAMPIONSHIP IN SOCCER.

>> HAVE THEY? >> I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

>> DON'T THEY? GIRLS SOCCER TEAM.

>> YEAH. >> THAT IS HERITAGE SIDE OF

TOWN. >> NOT TO THROW A WRENCH IN THE PLAN. BUT THERE IS A COMMENT.

>> YOU MAY START -- NEVER MIND. YOU MAY START -- STIR UP MORE

THAN THE WATER. >> ADD IT TO THE LIST FOR THE NEXT ONE. MAKE A MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

[VOTING] ITEM PASSES 5-0.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. THEY DOUSE THEMSELVES WITH CHLORINE. YES, SIR.

ITEM 2020-350, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A PRO RATA REPAYMENT

[2020-350]

>> THANK YOU. IF COUNCIL RECALLS SEVERAL MONTHS AGO S.U.P. CAME FOR ENCORE TO PUT A SHOP AND TRANSMISSION FACILITY HERE ON NORTH OF SHILOH AND EAST OF 67.

THE CITY 12-INCH WATER LINE STOPS SOUTH OF SHILOH.

IT'S 1856 FEET FROM THE CORNER SHOT THERE.

SO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY EXTENDING THE 12-INCH WATER LINE ALONG THE FRONTAGE HERE, WHICH IS OFF-SITE.

NOT ON HIS PROPERTY. CROSS SHILOH.

THIS IS THE EXTENT OF THE BOUNDARY.

WE DON'T NEED NEED IT TO EXTENT FURTHER NORTH.

THERE IS A PROVISION THAT THEY CAN REQUEST A PR PRORAY THE AGREEMENT -- PRO RATA AGREEMENT. HE IS SEARCHING FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST IF IT DEVELOPS.

SO ONLY IF IT DEVELOPS WOULD THE CITY BE RESPONSIBLE TO COLLECT FEES FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER. THE CITY WOULDN'T PAY ANYTHING.

THE CITY WOULD COLLECT THE FEES. THAT IS BASED ON A FRONT FOOT CHARGE. WHICH WAS CALCULATED WITHIN YOUR PACKET. IF I BELIEVE WAS $70.

THAT IS BASED ON $70 PER THE LINEAR FOOT.

IF THIS DEVELOPED IN A TEN-YEAR PERIOD THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO REQUEST FROM THE CITY THAT THE FEES BE COLLECTED FROM THE PROPERTY THAT IS DEVELOPING ADJACENT TO IT.

REPAID TO THE DEVELOPER. IT WOULD BE ONLY UP TO A MAXIMUM

OF $117,673. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: HOW MUCH LAND IS THERE? HOW MANY ACRES IS THAT?

>> THIS ONE? >> MAYOR RENO: YEAH.

>> I BELIEVE 13 ACRES OR SO. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

[VOTING] ITEM PASSES 5-0.

ITEM 2020-351, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN AGREEMENT FOR

[2020-351]

>> THANK YOU. IF YOU RECALL THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE 2020 TAX NOTE ISSUED RECENTLY.

ONE OF THE PROJECTS WAS LOOKING AT THE DESIGN FOR THE EXTENSION OF HAWKINS RUN ROAD. SO GOING FROM WHERE IT TERMINATES TO GET AND TIE IN HERE AT THE MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY IN THE MT. ZION ROAD INTERSECTION.

WITH THE SCHOOL. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

NUMBER 8. THAT IS, WE HAVE A MEETING WITH THEM THIS WEEK. IF THE PLAN IS THIS SCHOOL WOULD BE OPEN BY THE SUMMER. AUGUST OF 2022.

LOOKING AT LESS THAN TWO YEARS OUT.

FROM A STANDPOINT OF THE MOBILITY AND JUST BEING ABLE TO HAVE MUCH BETTER CONNECTIVITY, THE PLAN IS TO GET SOMETHING TO TIE BACK IN THIS AREA. THIS IS CONCEPT WALL IN NATURE.

[01:35:05]

SOMETHING WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS LIMIT IMPACT ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THE ATTEMPT IS PUT AS MUCH ON POSSIBLY TO LIMIT IMPACT TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

THIS IS HAD WHEN IT WAS ZONEDDED IN THE FUTURE.

PART OF THIS WOULD BE EXTENSION OF THE ROAD.

THEY LOOKED TO REOPEN MT. ZION ROAD UP AND TIE IT IN WITH THE DRIVE AT THE COLLEGE. THE YOU RIGHT OF WAY IS STILL THERE BUT IT USED TO CURVE AND DO THIS.

IT WAS DISCONNECTED YEARS AGO AS A CITY PROJECT.

WITH THE EXTENSION OF THE ROAD THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE EXTENSION OF A 12-INCH WATER LINE THAT WOULD TIE THE 16-INCH WATER LINE TO SERVE COMMUNITY PARK PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FEED TO THE PARK.

WE LOOK AT BRINGING A 12-INCH, 12 OR AN 8-INCH GRAVITY SEWER LINE 500 FEET TO PICK UP THE AREA IN THE PARK IF IT WAS DEVELOPED FOR NEED FOR A RESTROOM.

AGAIN, THIS IS FOR THE DESIGN COMPONENT OF IT.

AGAIN, IT WILL BE ONE THAT IS, IT WILL HAVE CHALLENGES TO IT.

WE WILL FIRST START OFFER LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. WE WILL START WORKING ON THE DESIGN. THEN WE COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR

ANY FUNDING. >> THIS LANE HERE?

>> CORRECT. >> SO IS MT. ZION ROAD?

>> THIS IS FOUR LANE UNDIVIDED ON THIS SIDE.

WE LOOKED AT POSSIBLY HAVING THIS MATCH WHAT IS ON THE EAST SIDE. THIS COULD BE FOUR-LANE UNDIVIDED IS THE CONCEPT. THEN LOOKING TO TRY TO SEE IF WE CAN CONTINUE THIS FOUR-LANE DIVIDED.

AT LEAST TO SOME EXTENT. THIS WOULD LOOK AT THE

THREE-LANE UNDIVIDED ROADWAY. >> WE ARE ON THIS TRACT HERE?

>> YES. >> MY ONLY QUESTION IS ARE WE GOING TO MAKE THE SCHOOL PAVE FROM THERE TO THERE?

>> WE WILL HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE SCHOOL.

THEY ARE INTERESTED IN THIS PROJECT AND FOR THE PROJECT TO BE HOPEFULLY UNDERWAY AND HOPEFULLY COMPLETED PRIOR TO THE SCHOOL. IT WILL DEFINITELY SERVE THE SCHOOL. GOAL IS TO BE WORK SOME TYPE OF AGREEMENT WITH THE SCHOOL TO SEE IF WE CAN'T HAVE COST PARTICIPATION ON A PORTION OF IT.

YES, SIR. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 5-0. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

>> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU. SORRY.

I THINK THIS IS THE MOST I HAVE HAD.

>> MAYOR RENO: ON A ROLL. >> YOU HAVE BEEN UP HERE AS LONG

AS I HAVE SEEN YOU. >> MAYOR RENO: THIS PUTS YOU WELL IN FRONT OF ADAM. ITEM 2020-352, CONSIDER AND ACT

[2020-352]

$126,600. >> ALONG WITH THE 2020 TAX NOTE ANOTHER PROJECT DISCUSSED AND WORKING ON THE DESIGN IS THE REALIGNMENT OF THE MT. ZION ROAD THAT TIES IN SOUTH OF THE ACCESS ROAD ALONG 287. WITH THE 14TH STREET NOW.

THE INTENT IS TO TRY TO PULL THE INTERSECTION, THE ROADWAY AWAY SO YOU DON'T HAVE AN INTERSECTION WHERE YOU HAVE TWO ROADS THAT CARRY QUITE A BIT OF TRAFFIC.

THAT ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. IN SOME POINT WITH THE HOSPITAL AND THE STADIUM AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING ALONG 14TH STREET. WE BELIEVE THAT THE INTERSECTIONS WILL BE SIGNALIZED BY THE TXDOT IN THE FUTURE.

RIGHT NOW AS PART OF THE 14TH STREET PROJECT WE COMPLETED THERE IS IMMEDIATE OPENING AND THE LEFT TURN WITH THE INTENT TO GET GEARED UP FOR THIS.

PART OF THE PROJECT AGAIN IT WOULD INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, REMOVAL OF A PORTION IF NOT ALL OF THE SEGMENT OF THE ROAD.

EXTENSION OF THE MEDIAN THROUGH THE INTERSECTION.

CLOSER TO THE ACCESS ROAD. THIS S SEGMENT OF MT. ZION ROAD COULD BE RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT DRIVE TO SERVE THIS DEVELOPMENT HERE. OTHER THAN THAT, THE SEGMENT WOULD NO LONGER BE CONNECTED THERE AT THE 14TH STREET.

>> SINCE THIS IS OUR PROPERTY, ARE WE GOING --

>> SAME QUESTION. EXACT SAME QUESTION.

>> ARE WE NOT WORRIED ABOUT TAKING AWAY OUR ROAD FRONTAGE?

>> A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE, THIS RIGHT HERE, THE INTENT WOULD BE THAT THERE MIGHT BE POSSIBILITY OF COMING IN AND HAVING A TYPE OF -- RIGHT NOW, 4B, THIS IS A 4B PROPERTY.

THE PROPERTY, IT'S CHALLENGED FROM THE STANDPOINT OF PUTTING SOMETHING IN HERE. YOU HAVE A GAS LINE THAT CUTS

[01:40:04]

ACCESS THROUGH HERE. WE LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF MAYBE HAVING A DRIVE THAT WOULD COME THROUGH.

TIE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE. TO HAVE THE ACCESS TO PROPERTY

TO THE WEST. >> I REMEMBER THEY PUT THAT IN.

THEY SPEND MONEY TO TEAR IT OUT. >> MAYOR RENO: WHO OWNS THE

PROPERTY SOUTH? >> THIS PROPERTY HERE?

>> NO. BETWEEN THE RED LINE.

>> THIS IS OWNED BY JERRY JOB. THIS IS STILL OWNED BY TIM STEVENSON. THEY STILL OWN THE HOUSE AND THE

PROPERTY HERE. >> THE DEVELOPMENT OWNS THIS LOT

AS WELL. >> OKAY.

>> WITH EVERYTHING GOING ON OVER THERE, WOULD THIS NOT BE A BETTER PROJECT TO LET GO FOR A YEAR OR TWO AND LET SOMEBODY FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO BUY? PUT IT ON A THROW AS A ROAD WE ARE GOING TO DO.

BUT UNTIL STEVENSON SELL THEIR HOUSE WE DON'T HAVE A CLUE.

WE COULD GO 30 FEET NORTH OR 30 FEET SOUTH.

TO MAKE IT MORE OF A PERFECT ALIGNMENT IF WE WENT ACROSS THE MIDDLE OF THE HOUSE. IF HE SOLD THE HOUSE AND -- I

LOVE STRAIGHT STREETS. >> YES, SIR.

>> SOMETHING WE LOOK AT, NOT THAT WE CAN'T CHANGE THIS UP.

BUT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS GET THE SPACING AWAY FROM HERE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. 600 FOOT SPACING REQUIREMENT.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT TERRY LOVE BUILDS UP HOUSES.

LET THE HOUSE BUILDER PAY FOR THE ROADS.

>> HE HAS TALKED ABOUT WORKING WITH US ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.

>> RIGHT OF WAY. >> YES, SIR.

>> FUNDED THROUGH THE TAX? >> YES.

>> WOULD YOU PUT THREE-WAY STOP HERE? INITIALLY I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE WARRANTED.

I THINK WE HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE TRAFFIC IS DOING.

RIGHT NOW THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF THE TRAFFIC HERE.

SOMETHING THAT WOULD COME TO PLAY AS WELL IS GOING BACK REAL FAST IF THERE IS A CONNECTION MADE HERE.

A LOT OF TRIPS DO THIS AND COME BACK THIS WAY.

WE MAY ELIMINATE SOME OF THOSE. I WOULDN'T SAY WE ELIMINATE ALL BY ANY MINES BUT WE COULD LOOK TO SEE IF IT IS WARRANTED.

>> I WOULD THINK IT WOULD HELP QUITE A BIT ON THE HOUSES.

TRYING TO GET TO KROGER ON THE NORTH END.

THEY MIGHT GO UP HIGHWAY TO THE SERVICE ROAD AND BACK ACROSS TO HELP GET BACK. HAWKIHAWKINS SPRING?

>> HAWKINS RUN ROAD? >> YES, SIR.

CUT THROUGH THAT TO GET TO THE SHOP.

>> MAYOR RENO: MY UNSCIENTIFIC SURVEY THE TRAFFIC ON MT. ZION ROAD IS GOING TO BYPASS IN FRONT OF THE BYPASS.

TO THE MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY AREA. WHAT IS THE TRAFFIC YOU

ANTICIPATE ON MT. ZION ROAD? >> THIS SEGMENT OF MT. ZION

ROAD? >> MAYOR RENO: YES, SIR.

THE WHOLE STRETCH IN THERE. MY UNSCIENTIFIC SURVEY PEOPLE ARE COMING FROM THE BYPASS TO THE MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY.

OR GOING TO THE MIDLOTHIAN. NOT GOING TO 14TH STREET.

AM I MAKING SENSE? >> YES, SIR.

THEY STILL CAN MAKE THIS MOVE. ONLY THING WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS PUSH IT AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION AREA.

AS 14TH STREET AND THE TRAFFIC CONTINUES TO GROW.

IF YOU SEE THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPEN UP IT WILL CHANGE THE TRAFFIC PATTERNS. WHEN YOU START HAVING THE INTERSECTIONS LIKE THIS. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THIS CONTROLLED. THEN YOU COME HERE AND HAVE

ANOTHER CONTROL. >> MAYOR RENO: WHAT IS THE INTERSECTION YOU ARE TRYING TO GET RID OF?

>> YES. THE MAIN INTENT IS ELIMINATE THE INTERSECTION. IN THE FUTURE AS THE TRAFFIC GROWS WE'LL HAVE ISSUES WITH THIS IN PROXIMITY TO THE

FRONTAGE ROAD. >> MAYOR RENO: CONTROL WHERE IT RUNS TO 14TH. I'M CONFUSED.

>> WHICH? >> MAYOR RENO: THE ONE YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT. THE "T" ON 14TH.

>> I SEE WHAT MIKE IS ALSO SAYING THAT I HAVEN'T THOUGHT OF BEFORE. THAT SHORT LEG WE HAD THERE AFTER 14TH STREET OPENED UP. 875 AND THE TRAFFIC FLOWING TO

[01:45:03]

HOW DO ELIMINATE THAT EVENTUALLY? ARE YOU ABLE TO ELIMINATE THAT DOWN THE ROAD?

>> IT WILL. >> THE INTENT AGAIN IS --

>> ON THAT SIDE. WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER SIDE?

>> ---- >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: TO THE WEST. TO THE WEST.

>> HERE WOULD ONLY SERVE THIS DEVELOPMENT SINCE THIS IS UNDER THE CONTRACT. MY UNDERSTANDING.

SO THIS IS A PRIVATE DRIVE. RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT.

THEY STILL HAVE THE ACCESS RIGHT HERE THROUGH THIS.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: SO THIS BASICALLY THE PURPOSE OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS TO TAKE CARE OF ISSUE THAT AND GET YOUR 600-FOOT-PLATES SETBACK. FOR THE NEXT --

>> RIGHT. LOOK AT NOW WHAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AT SOME POINT IF THE PROPERTY DOES START TO DEVELOP WE WON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY. WHEN YOU START ADDING THE SIGNALS IN TO THIS AND YOU ARE TRYING TO CONTROL THE TRAFFIC ON A SIDE STREET THAT IS SO CLOSE, IT DOES CREATE ISSUES.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: SO ARE YOU PROPOSING GOING BACK TO WHAT TED SAID WHICH I LIKE, ARE YOU PROPOSING THAT WE WILL START MOVING ON THIS REAL FAST? OR WE ALREADY KNOW THAT THIS IS GOING TO DEVELOPMENT. THAT WHOLE HUB.

IT IS NOT TO OUR ADVANTAGE TO LET THAT SIT FOR A COUPLE MORE YEARS AND IMPLEMENT THAT WITHIN, GET ON A THOROUGHFARE PLANE AND IMPLEMENT THAT IN DEVELOPMENT. GETTING HELP WITH THAT?

>> ALL WE ARE DOING IS DESIGNING AT THIS POINT.

WE ARE NOT BUILDING IT. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: WE CAN STILL POTENTIALLY GET HELP WITH THAT.

>> SURE. IF

>> I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN DO THIS.

THE TAX NOTE IS ALREADY ISSUED OR WAS APPROVED BUT INSTEAD OF US PAYING MONEY TO DESIGN IT. CAN WE THROW IT ON THE TURF AS A 60-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY AND LET DEVELOPER DEAL WITH THE DESIGN?

>> THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IT.

>> WE ARE STILL MOVING FORWARD TO PAY FOR IT.

I BELIEVE. I SAY DON'T PAY FOR IT AT ALL

AND PUT IT ON THOROUGHFARE. >> THAT IS WHAT I'M TALKING

ABOUT. >> OH.

>> WE COULD ADD IT AS A THOROUGHFARE.

SOMETHING TO LOOK AT IS WHEN THIS PROPERTY IS ALREADY ZONED AND IT DOESN'T HAVE A SITE PLAN BUT IT'S ALREADY ZONED.

I'LL HAVE TO LOOK TO SEE IF WE CAN COME IN AFTER THE FACT.

ADD A NEW STREET TO SAY THAT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY.

>> IT WILL BE A LARGER THOROUGHFARE.

>> THE INTENT WAS TO TRY TO GET IT NOW WHILE YOU CAN.

OR GET SOMETHING ESTABLISHED. MAYBE A RIGHT-OF-WAY OR DESIGN DONE IF THE COUNCIL DOESN'T WANT TO BUILD IT.

WE CAN HOLD OFF TO LOOK AT BUILDING IT.

>> MY ONLY CONCERN -- >> MAYOR RENO: YOU CAN STILL

GET THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> NO, SIR.

NOT WITHOUT AMENDING THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN.

AND THEY ALREADY HAVE ZONING. THOUGH IT HAS USES IT DOESN'T HAVE A SITE PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

IF WE COULD COME IN AFTER THE FACT TO PUT A ROAD AND SAY NOW YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT DEVELOPER AFTER YOU HAVE ZONING.

I HAVE TO CHECK ON THAT. >> MY ONLY OTHER CONCERN IF WE GET RID OF THIS AND WE FEED THIS.

WE KNOW ON THE OTHER MAP YOU ARE BRINGING IT IN HERE.

WE HAVE ANOTHER MAJOR ROAD. THESE ARE NOT THAT FAR APART.

ARE WE NOT MAKING ANOTHER CONGESTED AREA DOWN THE ROAD?

>> I DON'T THINK YOU WILL WHEN YOU DESIGN THE ROADS.

I DON'T THINK YOU CONGESTION THERE.

>> I WAS SCARED WE WERE GOING TO END UP IN 15 YEARS WITH FOUR STOPLIGHTS. ALL RIGHT THERE.

>> WE COULD AT SOME POINT. AGAIN, AT THIS POINT RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ON THE MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY.

THIS IS DEPENDENT ON WHAT THE TRAFFIC DOES.

I THINK YOU ARE LIMITED. OAK TREE IS REALLY NOT DESIGNED TO HANDLE A BUNCH OF THE TRAFFIC.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO COME IN. NO PLANS TO COME IN AND MAKE IMPROVEMENTS. THE GOAL AND THE HOPE WOULD BE YOU HAVE TRAFFIC ON 14TH, 663.

THEN COMING ALONG LEAD STONE LANE AND MT. ZION ROAD AND HEAD

TO MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: MIKE, IF YOU COULD HELP ME AS LONG AS WE LOOK TO THE OVERVIEW.

WHAT IS THE REASON THAT WE WENT THROUGH AND MADE OAK TREE LANE BASICALLY A NON-TRUCK ROAD? QUICKLY.

I AM NOT -- I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY BRAIN AROUND WHY WE DID THAT.

>> YES, SIR. WHAT WAS HAPPENING IS MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY NOW AND THE OAK TREE TIE TO 14TH STREET.

WE WERE HAVING REPORTS FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF THE TRUCKS THAT WERE CONTINUING DOWN MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY HEADING TO OAK TREE. COMING OFF OF 14TH STREET

DOWN OAK TREE. >> I GOT YOU.

[01:50:04]

>> IS THIS FOUR-WAY STOP? >> ANSWER IT LATER.

>> WE DON'T KNOW. THIS IS A CONCEPT PLAN.

I DON'T KNOW HOW EVERYTHING WILL FIT IN HERE WITH THE DIFFERENT

ALIGNMENTS. >> I SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING.

BUT IT FEELS WEIRD TO ME WE THAT GO OVER IT AND TIE IT BACK.

TRYING TO VISUALIZE. >> THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT THE STAFF LOOKED AT. IF THE STAFF SAYS WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE THE CONNECTION BACK AGAIN, LEAVE IT OFF.

THE THOUGHT THIS IS MADE OF A NORTH/SOUTH.

BUT IT CAN STAY CUL-DE-SAC LIKE IT IS.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DEVELOP WISE --

>> IF YOU LOOK AT THAT AS A PROGRAM WITH A LONG-TERM.

I DON'T THINK IT'S DISADVANTAGES YOU.

DISADVANTAGE -- -- DISADVANTAGE. I THINK IT WILL SERVE IT WELL.

>> THIS IS HIGH DENSITY. TO PUT MY PERSONAL BELIEF YOU WILL END UP WITH THE HIGH DENSITY HERE.

CONFERENCE CENTER. YOU WILL END UP HIGH.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY NO TO IT. LIKE WELL --

>> THE NICE THING ABOUT IT, SINCE WE HAVE A RIGHT-OF-WAY AND WE OWN THE PROPERTY. IF WE DON'T WANT TO INCLUDE IT AS PART OF IT. WE CAN COME IN AND IT COULD BE MADE AT A LATER DAY. WE HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

WE OWN THE PROPERTY WELL. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: MY QUESTION AND I DON'T WANT TO -- I'M JUST JUMPING OUT.

THIS IS ALL OUR PROPERTY, RIGHT? >> YES, SIR.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: IS THIS PROPERTY HERE DEVELOPED ON?

>> THERE ARE HOMES ON IT. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: THAT DOWN THERE BY THE CREEK. WE CAN'T JUST COME THROUGH HERE AND TIE IN. IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A LOT

GOING ON WITH ALL OF THIS HERE. >> YES, SIR.

>> SCHOOL RIGHT THERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS:

NEVER MIND. >> DROP 30 FOOT.

>> SEE WHAT YOU WERE SAYING. >> COUNCILMEMBER RODGERS: THAT

IS WHY MIKE MAKES THE BIG BUCKS. >> YEAH.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

I THINK WE BEAT THAT HORSE ENOUGH.

MIKE, TELL ME YOU HAVE NO MORE. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO

APPROVE AND SECONDED. >> WE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY.

THAT WAS IN BUDGET, RIGHT? >> YES, SIR.

TAX NOTE. YES, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: I'M THINKING. POLICY HERE IS -- I CAN STILL CALL FOR A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT.

>> TAKE A BATHROOM BREAK, TOO. >> MAYOR RENO: NO.

MAYBE SO. CAST YOUR VOTES.

PASSES 4-0. COUNCILMAN COFFMAN ABSENT.

ITEM 2020-353, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A PROPOSAL FROM SIEMENS

[2020-353]

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS AN UNEXPECTED EXPENDITURE. RECENTLY WE HAVE HAD ISSUE WITH THE PUMP NUMBER FOUR, V.F.D. WE HAVE TWO PUMPS AT THE RAW WATER PUMP STATION THAT ARE CONSTANT SPEEDS.

THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO ADJUST BASICALLY THE PUMPAGE.

SO YOU CAN UTILIZE ONE PUMP AND IT HAS A WIDER RANGE OF PUMPING ABILITY THAN THE CONSTANT SPEED. IT WAS IN PLACE IN 2003.

PUT IN THE V.F.D. SO SINCE THAT TIME IT HAS BEEN UNDER A CONSTANT OPERATION. THIS IS THE ONE PUMP UTILIZED THE MOST AT THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT BECAUSE OF THE RANGE AND LARGER PUMP. SO IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS WE HAVE HAD ISSUE WITH THE PUMP TRIPPING AND IT GOT TO THE POINT THAT THE PUMP WON'T START AND OPERATE. WE LOOK AT WHAT IS NECESSARY TO DO REPAIRS. WE COULD LOOK AT REFURBISHING OR REBUILDING THE CURRENT V.F.D. THROUGH SIEMENS.

THAT IS WHAT THIS $120,525 IS FOR.

OR LOOK TO PUT IN NEW V.F.D. WHICH WAS MORE THAN TWICE THE COST OF THIS. TO LOOK AT COMING IN TO CHIPPING OUT THE 12 POWER CELLS REMANUFACTURED AND CHANGE OUT ELECTRICAL OPPONENTS IN THE 12 CELLS AND THE NEW CONTROLLER, WE SHOULD GET AT LEAST TEN PLUS YEARS ON THE PUMP.

OR THE V.F.D. SORRY.

NOT THE PUMP ITSELF. ONE THING WE LOOK AT, AT SOME POINT IN THE RELATIVELY NEAR FUTURE WE WANT TO CHANGE OUT THE 4160 POWER OUT AT THE RAW WATER PUMP STATION TO GO WITH THE 480.

[01:55:01]

PUT IN THE 80S. SO IF AND WHEN WE MAKE A CHANGE WE HAVE TO CHANGE OUT COMPONENTS WITH THE PUMPS AS WELL.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO PROCEED. THIS IS THE MAIN PUMP WE USE AT THE RAW WATER PUMP STATION. WE HAVE THE FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE WITHIN THE UTILITY FUND.

AGAIN, THIS IS UNPLANNED FOR EXPENDITURES.

SO IT WASN'T IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET AND IT WASN'T PLANNED FOR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET BUT WAS IN STRATEGIC PLAN FOR FOLLOWING YEAR. WE WERE GETTING THE COST QUOTES.

IT COULD BE FUNDED THROUGH UTILITY FUND OR LINE ITEM THAT IS PART OF SAVINGS FROM THE RAW WATER PURCHASE FROM TRWD.

HAPPEN TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> MOVE TO APPROVE AND SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE.

SEND. PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 5-0. >> THANK YOU.

[2020-354]

DISTRICT. >> YOU ARE NOT MIC'D.

>> SORRY. APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE.

THIS IS REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, WEST SIDE PRESERVE FOR THE COST INCURRED RELATED TO THE PUBLIC C IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID SIX MONTHS AGO. THE NEXT ITEM IS AN AGREEMENT WITH THE MARY PETTY OF THE P3 WORKS.

BUT THE DEVELOPER PUT UP IN AN ACCOUNT THAT IS $15,000.

WE WILL UTILIZE THAT MONEY TO PAY FOR THE JOE, MARY PETTY AND ENGINEERING. THOSE THINGS.

THIS AMOUNT REIMBURSEMENT BY THE P.I.D. IF IT'S APPROVED.

IT DOES NOT BEHOLD US TO THE P.I.D. OR CREATING THE P.I.D.

IT JUST HELPS REVIEW TO GET DOCUMENTS WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH IN THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS FROM THE REDDEN FARMS. THROUGH WESTSIDE PRESERVE. WESTSIDE PRESERVE, EXCUSE ME, 506-ACRE PLAN DEVELOPMENT WEST OF TOWN.

I GUESS BETWEEN THE OLD FORT WORTH AND 287 ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE 564. WHICH WE TALK ABOUT WITH MR. CHARLIE ANDERSON. I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0.

>> THANK YOU. SORRY.

GO AHEAD. >> MAYOR RENO: OKAY.

[2020-355]

>> THANK YOU. THIS IS ENGAGEMENT LETTER WITH THE P3. MARY PETTY IS P3-WORKS.

SHE HELPS EHAVE WAIT THE QUALITY AND THE QUANTITY OF THE P.U.D.

PAID FOR BY THE PREVIOUS ITEM. SHE WAS INVALUABLE ON THE REDDEN FARMS. TO WALK US THROUGH THAT AND HELPING MYSELF. I WON'T SAY THAT SHE HELPED JOE.

JOE PROBABLY KNEW IT ALL BEFORE ALL OF THAT ANYWAY.

>> BIG HELP. >> THIS IS WELL WORTH IT AND

PAID FOR BY THE DEVELOPER. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE.

>> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR RENO: ITEM PASSES 5-0. ITEM 2020-356, CONSIDER AND ACT

[2020-356]

>> GOOD EVENING. I WILL JUST BRIEFLY LET YOU KNOW THAT THIS IS A RENEWAL. WE PURCHASED THIS THROUGH COOPERATIVE GROUP. IT'S ABOUT A 9% INCREASE.

THERE IS ONE ERROR IN WRITE-UP. IT DOES SAY IN THE FINANCIAL IMPACT A DIFFERENT NUMBER. BUT THE AMOUNT $420,051.

THIS INCLUDES THE NEW FIRE STATION AND IT ADDS ADDITIONAL VEHICLES AND THE ADDITIONAL POLICE.

OFFICERS. ADDITIONAL OTHER EQUIPMENT.

THAT RESULTED IN THE INCREASE. I WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS

ANYBODY MIGHT HAVE. >> IN THE BUDGET?

>> YES. IT WAS BUDGETED.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. >> THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR RENO: ITEM PASSES 5-0.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ANN. AT THIS POINT WE'LL BREAK IN TO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSIDER PERSONNEL MATTERS TO

[Executive Session]

WE STAND ADJOURNED AT 8:00.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.